The Remnant
from Canada writes:
:I said this yesterday, and post this as a reminder. What we have here is the 'seen vs. unseen' fallacy at work.

Government produces no wealth. They take wealth from others and redistribute it to others under their monopoly of the monetary system and violence. Let me illustrate with an example:

A and B put their heads together and decide what C shall be made to do for D. All eyes are on how D benefits. Endless political commentary and punditry abound around D. A and B is the State. C is the person who does productive economic work and pays taxes extorted via A and B and D is the recipient of the swindled money from C, less the cut that A and B squander on themselves or their favoured insiders.

What is not seen is the economic benefits of what C might have done if C was allowed to retain his money and spend it as they saw fit. Existing businesses would not receive C's money anymore or future businesses may not come into existence. In otherwords, current and future businesses effectively subsidize D, favoured by A and B.

A and B have another mechanism to swindle C; devalue the money s/he has in their pockets by printing new currency into existence to finance D. This new currency has an inflationary effect on C's savings for today, tomorrow, or passed onto C's children. Government sponsored inflationary attacks on C by the State/Banking cartel rob C in such a manner that not one in a million C's can diagnose. C pays for D via inflation, not taxation.

The most skilled statistician cannot tell you what millions of C's would have done, today or tomorrow, had they been allowed to retain their money (or the value of it) to spend into the economy.

The Remnant
from Canada writes:
:Partisan politics are a ruse. There is no left/right in a feudal system, only top and bottom. Lords and Serfs. It keeps the masses divided through unimportant arguments via the political system, while the government/banking monetary system preys on us, our children, and future unborn uninterrupted.

If you have a monopoly on violence (the State) you need not be logically consistent; you can change the rules at any time. The process of voting will not buy you freedom.

As long as we continue to subjugate/prostrate ourselves to an organization that stole our freedoms by claiming a monopoly on violence, usurped our money and leaving us with a pile of counterfeit paper whose supply and value is arbitrarily regulated, not by market forces, but political ones, we will continue to be plundered.

From the cradle to the grave, Statist brainwashing (via government indoctrination camps euphemistically called 'public education') and a subverted media (if newspapers needed a bailout, this would absolutely happen - who would be the State propaganda agents?) has utterly, hopelessly convinced the public that the solution to all their woes is through a group of people that have a gun. Anybody who has a monopoly on violence is subject to bribery and corruption.

We don't vote out of sake of preference, although many of us think so, we vote to coerce each other into accepting the shade of lipstick applied to the pig of the State to violently fleece our fellow citizen. We vote to change the direction where the gun is pointed. Voting is political 'might makes right'. A majority knows - given their vast extensive philosophical and economic knowledge, right? - what to foist on the minority.

'Reform cannot be achieved by a well-intentioned leader who recruits his followers from the very people whose moral confusion is the cause of the disorder.' - Socrates

kotter 49
from Canada writes:
Seems like a reasoned response to me. I hope the cons don't start gloating as if this were a victory. 34 billion more of debt is a Pyrrhic victory at best. I think the Iggie-Harper combo will work for a while. Now let's see if Harper responds in kind.

Iggy supports for now while the economy continues to tumble. 9-12 months from now when the economy is really in the toilet and the Libs have picked up a few bucks for the war chest, there will be an election.

And incumbents in bad economies are also known as losers. Just ask George W. Bush........Bush Sr. for that matter too.

Bruce Gerrard
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Count Iggy strikes again....does this guy ever take a stand on ANYTHING?!?!?! I will be part of the coallition...I will not... I will pass the budget, but at the same time I will not....What a joke. Iggy please go back to shcool where you can debate ideas all day. Unfortunately politics requires action and strength of conviction to things you severely lack.

Carl C.
from Saint-Lambert, Canada writes:
Excellent idea from Ignatieff. I would have preferred amendments avoiding to make the income tax permanent which is quite worrisome for the economy, but i do think that Ignatieff did the right thing. I really approve his attitude.

P Logan
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Yes, it definitely appears to be a primarily political response. Given the long list of problems that Iggy identified in the budget, substantive amendments appear to be in order.

Systemic Risk
from Canada writes:
The caption should read: 'He's mad, he's bad, and he's the new guy in town....and if you step out of line, he'll go feudalistic on your a**, Russian style....' That picture is hilarious!!!

Geoffrey May
from Canada writes:
Ignatieff has revealed himself a gutless fool .How many last chances does he give ? Probation is not a parliamentary concept , its a cop out .Too bad the Liberals dumped Dion , he has guts.

Stan L
from Canada writes:
I like this response, while the budget is a dud in my opinion, it is not so much so that I would force an election over it. I think the great thing about it, is that it will FORCE Harper to actually follow the protocols he himself set-up with the parlimentary budget officer....no one will stand for the fudged numbers nonsense after November's debacle.

p lailey
from vancouver, Canada writes:
Once again Ignatieff takes a brave stand on principles. Never forget that Ignatieff was the last one to sign the coalition agreement. Not the second last one, but the very last one! The man also took a brave stand by supporting GW Bush's invasion of Iraq while other so-called human rights' experts lacked his courage and spoke out against it. Then once the war became unpopular and he set his eyes on the Liberal leadership he took another brave stand and reversed his support.

Michael Ignatieff: Principles if necessary but not necessarily principled.

Large Double Single
from Halifax, Canada writes:
Iggy says to the government: Do what you said you are going to do or we will defeat you! How can the government refuse this?

Masterful, what a difference from Dion.

Like I said before, the budget will pass but it does not mater what the government does. We will have another election within 6 months when the liberals are ready. That way the liberals can blame the government for the deficit and make themselves look like our saviors.

NL Patriot
from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes:
This decision should be a signal to the NDP that Jack Layton has to go. It is time that they got them selves an adult leader and someone who can be taken seriously.

He is so desparate to get the NDP into power that he would do anything regardless of how it impacts the rest of the country.

I don't lile this budget. I don't like all this big spending because I don't think it is going to work.

I don't like the changes that Harper slipped in to the Equalization formula that is going to cost NL an extra 1.5B over three years, the equilivant of removing 22 Billion from Onatrio's economy in 1 year.

How are we supposed to take part in this stimulus when our ability to provide the matching funds has been stripped from us by a Partisan Hack like Harper.

That being said, this budget if it works will be good for other areas of the country and that is pretty important. Danny Williams and us Newfoundlanders will have to bide our time and live to fight Harper another day.

Billy Bee
from Canada writes:
D R from Canada writes: 'Tactical advantage now goes to the Liberals ... if the amendment passes, Harper has to pass a taste test on a quarterly basis. Accountability with teeth.'

Agreed. I like how the Con hacks on this form go mute when Harper's lack of 'accontable, transparent and responsible' govn't gets thrown back at them. Or they go to the usual 'blame the liberals' mantra. Take a look on Harper's Access to Info record or his strangle hold on the most pointless info released to the public - seems to me this clown has something to hide!

Sorry, guys, Harper is quickly proving himself incapable of keeping a promise. He is interested only in a majority, but too dumb to realize that spin, flip-flopping and paranioa won't get him there - unless you're actually dumb enough to believe it!

Stan L
from Canada writes:
Further to my post....what I like about his response is that the onus for this budget to work falls squarely on the Conservatives. IF the Liberals had proposed amendments, Harper would simply try and 'share' the blame.......Igantieff seems to be giving him enough rope to hang himself, but not so much rope that he can't pull them down at regular intervals....good move Igantieff.

'Capital must protect itself in every possible manner by combination and legislation. Debts must be collected, bonds and mortgages must be foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When, through a process of law, the common people lose their homes they will become more docile and more easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of government, applied by a central power of wealth under control of leading financiers. This truth is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism of Capital to govern the world. By dividing the voters through the political party system, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance. Thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves what has been so well planned and so successfully accomplished.'

Systemic Risk
from Canada writes:
Bob Cajun - I like your mortgage interest deductibility idea but that would in effect be a huge tax cut, mainly to the upper middle class. The tax cuts that are on offer are a joke mainly because they are so tiny - about 0.15% of GDP by my reckoning - largely symbolic, which is typical harper, trying to appear to please everyone with actually doing much.

Spencer C
from Canada writes:
So basically Iggy just handed the gun to Harper and said 'Your turn'.

Requiring periodic status reports is reasonable, requiring status reports which would trigger additional confidence votes is ridiculous, I can't see Harper agreeing to that, nor is it a good thing for stability in Canada.

bill johnson
from Quebec, Canada writes:
I like Iggy. He is a real competitor for Harper. However, for any Liberal to suggest he is putting the conservatives on probation is simplt too much to stand. Half of the Liberal party should be in jail. They stole from Canadians outright, and remain non-repentant. Alphonse was their chief representative not only in cabinet but in the 'family' as well.

If they wish to do something to benefit the country instead of themselves, the Liberals should force Harper to put hundreds of millions into the research councils. Cutting rather than adding to budgets of agencies responsible for a knowledge economy is nothing more than fools gold.

Norman Petit
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Now that the Prime Minister Harper has woken up and realized that no one gets to live in Kansas forever, I hope that this minority government continues to function through the worst of this economic downturn. All Canadians will benefit from governance with strong oversight from the opposition.

I would have preferred that he bring down the Harper government and take over the role of Prime Minister, but that is understandably a difficult decision and an onerous commitment to make at this time.

The budget is not so bad, and if Harper is made to adhere to its provisions we get the best of both worlds.

Liberals get the package they want, and the Conservatives do all the work. If the Coalition sticks together, which I hope it would, they can monitor progress and fire Harper later for dereliction of duty if so required.

There is a good chance the Coalition will crumble, though. Layton and Duceppe will be very upset. Hopefully, through the vote processes enough concessions will be made to mollify their anger and soothe their dissent. I guess it doesn't matter, though. The NDP and the Bloc will continue to oppose Harper since the PM has antagonized them so much in the past. Ignatieff will still hold the big stick and can whack Harper with it at his discretion.

snow crash
from Canada writes:
The only way that Iggy can humiliate Harper even more would be to demand that he stand up in the House and slap himself in front of all the sitting MP's or else the Liberals pull the plug. As it stands, Harper must throw up a little inside his mouth every time he tries to sell this deficit budget.

Silent Majority
from Canada writes:
Beavis,One step out of line and..... wait for it...... the Liberals will do nothing. The Liberal Party of Canada is financially, intellectually and morally bankrupt yet you somehow think they have some extraordinary power to run government from the sidelines?

Stan L
from Canada writes:
Spencer C from Canada writes: So basically Iggy just handed the gun to Harper and said 'Your turn'.Requiring periodic status reports is reasonable, requiring status reports which would trigger additional confidence votes is ridiculous, I can't see Harper agreeing to that, nor is it a good thing for stability in Canada.

===============================

In other circumstances, I would agree with you regarding stability...but with this PM the only accountibility and responsibility he seems to understand is the threat of losing power.....But you are right, I am not so sure he would agree to this......but the question is, does Harper want to be the one that forces an election?

Pete H
from Canada writes:
So there you have it, the coalition is and has been dead since Iggy was annointed. The liberals have approved the budget and as predicted taken credit. Iggy now tries to extend the leverage of a failed coalition with a threat to invoke it again. Not going to work, but I do like the arrogant posturing of the annointed liberal leader, right in line the usual liberal brand. Will they ever learn?

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
Systemic Risk from Canada writes: Bob Cajun - I like your mortgage interest deductibility idea but that would in effect be a huge tax cut, mainly to the upper middle class. The tax cuts that are on offer are a joke mainly because they are so tiny - about 0.15% of GDP by my reckoning - largely symbolic, which is typical harper, trying to appear to please everyone with actually doing much. --------------------------------------------------------Quick question. If you allow mortgage interest deductibility would that mean you'd have to pay capital gains when you sold your home ? I like the fact that your home is your's and the government can't get its hands on the money when you sell.

Mervin Hollingsworth
from Saskatoon, Sk, Canada writes:
Count Iggy's amendment is reasonable. However, I question the need for quarterly reports. Government is complicated and it takes time to get things rolling. Perhaps a report every 6 months would have been more realistic. What is the criteria for the Liberals' continued support? It appears he is being vague intentionally and I don't see the media forcing him to answer the question.Time will tell if the massive spending will pull Canada out of recession. What it may do is soften the blow. We will only come out of recession when the U.S. gets its act together.

david graham
from halifax, Canada writes:
nice photo op, that is the picture of a man neither voted in by the electorate nor elected to govern. i assume he will settle into his role as leader of the opposition assuming he can retain that position after both the leadership review and the next general election.

i was a lifelong liberal, but see no one on the horizon whom has declared himself to vote for. Manley maybe if he were interested, but the rest of the gang, nothing but opportunistic , single dimensional phonies.

Mary Anne Divjak
from Toronto, Canada writes:
How absolutely ridiculous! A Prime Minister of a country being put on probation by a leader of the opposition who wasn't even properly elected by the members of his own party. All huff and puff and I'll blow you away! It is unfortunate that Mr. Harper created, yes, created, a political climate/situation in which he's being hoisted on his own petard. Shame on all of you!

G len
from Halifax, Canada writes:
Lets hope the Cons and Libs can work together for a while. The Cons are in the lead and the libs need to follow, but the cons need/have been acquiescing this time. As for Jack, poor baby's time to make it to cabinet is running out. Who cares? Danny boy, everybody is going into deficit right now. NL is simply leading the way because you delayed drilling through your greed to the point NL oil patch is not economical with oil prices as they are. Who can we blame? Perhaps Danny should shoulder it all!

Naomi Y
from Canada writes:
NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: This decision should be a signal to the NDP that Jack Layton has to go. It is time that they got them selves an adult leader and someone who can be taken seriously.

He is so desparate to get the NDP into power that he would do anything regardless of how it impacts the rest of the country.

I don't lile this budget. I don't like all this big spending because I don't think it is going to work.------------------------------------------------------I agree, Taliban Jack could at least take a 5 min look at the budget before rejecting it.

The budget is not perfect but Harper basically abandon his principle and this budget is quite similar from what I will expect from the Liberal so I don't see reason to shoot it down.

Logic is full of Epic Win
from Canada writes:
I guess this will enable status updates to see whether or not the infrastructure monies get spent or not ... good, yes. But better would be achieved by making sure that the question 'Why Not?' is asked for any unspent stimulus.

Bruce Gerrard
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Billy Bee - sometimes a government has to do what is right for the country. I still believe that if the Conservatives run the nexte election on ridding political parties of public funding they would landslide victory.....but that is beside the point. Right to strike, absolutely. The unions and public service can afford to take their heads out of the trough in tough times.If you are okay with Iggy's response then you approve of political games. The entire play with the coalition, the response to the budget is all political gamesmanship.Hypocrisy knows No bounds I guess.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: Ignatieff did not want his fingerprints on the budget but still wants to appear strong.

I still really want to know what a Liberal response to the recession would be. However, I guess we'll never know. ================================================

Wrong Jack, the response is this very budget. Harper gave up all conviction and loaded it with what the opposition called for. This is the oppositions budget because Harper didn't have the pair to introduce his own.

They guy who campaigned last October on 'No deficits' is now bringing in Trudeau era budgets.

Mimi Williams
from Edmonton, Canada writes:
I am seriously considering finishing my tax deductible home renovations, selling, and moving to The Rock. No joke. Now, I'm off to return the paint that I bought for my back porch yesterday. I'll repurchase it today but the new receipts will be tax-deductible right? Ignatieff is spineless. At least Dion was passionate. The good news is that perhaps Layton can stop looking so eager to get into bed with him. Libs/Cons. Can you see the difference? My friends who are Liberals and Conservatives take no personal offense in me saying these things. We debate like grownups so I hope you Cons on this board can try the same. This budget is not a good budget. It has many flaws that the Liberals appear not to mind over-looking. Pay Equity. Employment Insurance. Cost-sharing with cash-strapped municipalities. Tax cuts for painting my house! Come on. The budget does nothing to create jobs and does nothing to protect the vulnerable. More substantial amendments need to be proposed by the Liberals than holding the Conservatives' feet to a faulty fire. Nothing for the environment. Money for research buildings and no money for researchers. No forgiveness on student loans. Curtailing women's right to pursue pay equity. An imposed 4 year collective agreement on public sector unions. And, frankly, Layton's credibility in all of this is severely damaged, too as he needed to be focussing in the last few days about the budget and not bothered worrying about the coalition, although obviously the two were tied.

jack sprat
from Canada writes:
Ignatieff is right. Itis a partisan and political budget (cruises in the St lawrence get $12 milion?). But, he knows a delay is not good. The reporting idea with speciofics is great, especially since Harper does most things in secret or late in the day or doesn't announce things at all (cancelling arctic patrol boats and slushbreaker).

The IMF released data today saying canada's recovery in 2010 will be about half of what the Cons assume in the budget.

Run that number and the deficit is well over $100 billion.

If that starts happening, Iggy will pull have to pull the plug. harper has a habit of rosying up his projections - you know, like in Novemeber when he said no deficit and a $100 million surplus.

Harper really has no clue, but Canadians do not want an election. We'll see one later this year or early next.

Johnny Test
from Pork Belly, Canada writes:
Loki Peterson from Toronto, Canada writes: How can Iggy allow these buffoons to keep on destroying the country? Iggy is as big a failure as Harpo if he doesn't bring down the government.

The budget was warmly received and a clear majority of Canadians support it. It would be stupid to vote against it and start over. Help is needed NOW! Ignatieff is to be commended for actually taking his time to reflect before making his decision - unlike Jack and Gilles who are now are going downhill...

Cynical in Toronto
from Canada writes:
Thsi is sensible and prudent, and puts the best interests of the country first. Get that stimulous spending out now, and hold the Tories' feet to the fire - they need to be under a microsope so they don't return to their childish bullying ways and waste time. Makes perfect sense to me. We do NOT need another election right now.

Mervin Hollingsworth
from Saskatoon, Sk, Canada writes:
Once again Danny Williams is shooting off his big mouth. He could care less about Canada. The fact is the drop of commodity prices has caused equalization to be too rich. Indications are that payouts would increase at the rate of 15% per year. That's hardly reasonable when the country is running deficits and is in recession. The fact is equalization will continue to grow but not as quickly. It will grow at the rate of the economy etc. That's a reasonable proposition. Besides I thought Nfld. was no longer a have not province. I think Danny still want to exclude oil revenues and collect equalization at the same time. Petty little man who lives on a rock.

mike sty the Coalition Centrist
from Canada writes:
Doug Dewan from Canada writes: Under the budget, a two-parent family with two children earning $80,000 would get $199 relief while the same family, if it earned only $20,000, would get $539.----------------

No Coalition
from Canada writes:
He told reporters the budget's measures around EI and tax cuts were not easy for his party to accept. “They came right up to the red line of what I could accept,” he said.

Iain Scott
from Canada writes:
As predicted, expected, and appropriate. And Jack and Gilles went up the hill... The NDP and the Bloc (and their supporters) may be quite vocal, but they are not very rationale, or even truthful.

Mimi Williams
from Edmonton, Canada writes:
NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: This decision should be a signal to the NDP that Jack Layton has to go. It is time that they got them selves an adult leader and someone who can be taken seriously.

He is so desparate to get the NDP into power that he would do anything regardless of how it impacts the rest of the country.

I don't lile this budget. I don't like all this big spending because I don't think it is going to work.

I don't like the changes that Harper slipped in to the Equalization formula that is going to cost NL an extra 1.5B over three years, the equilivant of removing 22 Billion from Onatrio's economy in 1 year.

How are we supposed to take part in this stimulus when our ability to provide the matching funds has been stripped from us by a Partisan Hack like Harper.

That being said, this budget if it works will be good for other areas of the country and that is pretty important. Danny Williams and us Newfoundlanders will have to bide our time and live to fight Harper another day.

Trillian Rand
from Canada writes:
The only surprising thing is that Mr Flaherty didn't include this quarterly report card in the budget.

Many have already said this is not a 'Conservative' budget. Some aspects of it will have undoubtedly angered 'real' Conservatives and yet Mr Flaherty didn't try to appease them with an 'out'. Rather than setting out two years of financial and political agony, he could have added a stipulation that any and all actions would be audited on a quarterly basis and changes made as necessary.

Instead he has committed to actions that cannot be undone for at least a year, no matter how well they are performing, without having to go back to Parliament and the public to say, 'Oops, we changed our minds,' and thereby incurring the inevitable accusations of incompetence or 'flip-flopping'.

All in all, many Canadians will applaud this move to hold the government accountable. And, in the final analysis, isn't that what Mr Harper promised us from the start?

Eric Martin
from Canada writes:
Putting the conservatives on probation with 3 month updates is very, very smart. It makes sense; the conservatives have made a complete reversal of the economic policies in a few weeks; do they mean it? They have shown willingness to break promises and violate their own laws; can they be trusted? Some of the measures proposed have too many strings attached; will they work?

Ignatieff knows that an unelected coalition would hurt his party in the long run. Furthermore, his party is not ready for an election. So he stays in control, with the threat not being a coalition but an election at the worst possible time for the conservatives. It the economy worsen, the electorate might be more willing to blame the government and toss it out.

P Martin
from St. John's, Canada writes:
Boo...Ignatieff had a perfectly viable alternative by voting against this terrible budget - the coalition. You put criminals on probation, not governments. They are either working or they are not. And Harper is not working. He should be gone and this was a golden opportunity to get rid of him.

Robin Adams
from Ottawa, Canada writes:
Iggy just lost a golden opportunity to lay waste to the CPC.

After taping and then publically releasing an opposition caucus meeting it can only mean that any 'confidence' the CPC had went out the window. It really wouldn't matter what they put in their budget it should be voted out on a matter of principle.

pole cat
from Canada writes:
Auroran Bear if you would look into things before you go off at the face you would know that bush sr and jr served there full terms before being replaced.Meaning they are only allowed 8 years,silly lefties lol.

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Sorry, NL Patriot, you have oil now so the government-to-government welfare cheques have to end sometime.

And you have no idea what its like to be hated by a major political party. For years the Liberals told Alberta that they would screw them for not electing any MPs. When Edmonton voted in a few Liberals but Calgary did not, the Liberals closed CFB and moved its operations to Edmonton.

NDP and Liberal politicians have routinely stopped in Alberta over the last few elections with promises of how they would screw us if they win. The last election, Layton promised to shut down oil sands development and Dion said he would wreck our economy, but it would be good for us in the long run.

By the way, Williams is not revered as a god-like figure in the rest of Canada. The ROC doesn't genuflect when he makes pronouncements.

J M M
from Canada writes:
Ignatieff can't afford an election futher more he can't win.Layton will be back in moth balls-Duceppe will keep whining for more money. Nothing new to-day. News Flash--D. Williams is back on Hate Pills-

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Auroran Bear, oh I agree that its a Liberal budget. But Ignatieff is saying now that the real, real Liberal budget would be different. I would just like him to put his cards on the table and stop being so dodgey.

weird world
from Canada writes:
Reasonable stance by the Liberals, we need to be updated as to what is happening on a regular basis. Nothing wrong with that. The economy cannot afford an election right now.

mike h
from Canada writes:
Broke their promise (to coalition) - and decided to support the budget. Well, I guess it was the right thing to do anyway - the Liberals are slowly moving back to the centre / removing the loney left elements.

wayne powers
from saskatoon, writes:
Finally someone is standing up to Harper and doing it with some real balls. Dion was the worst thing to happen to the Liberals in the party's history. As for the reform/pc party if they want to survive they have to dump Harper, he has shown that he is not the smart guy they thought he was.

Joan Forsey
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Mervin Hollingsworth from Saskatoon says Danny Williams 'could care less about Canada.' Right, Mervin. That means he cares. If he didn't care, how could he 'care less'?

suburban guy
from Mississauga, Canada writes:
The Waffle King! Long live Iggy. Wow he will keep us in perpetual suspense as to whether or not he deems the PM is doing the right thing. And if not, he will unleash his hounds - Jack & Gilles, and allow them to help him forge a new direction for this great country. Iggy will play the part well. He has the scowl down pat now. Perhaps he will one day develop a plan to put some substance back into his party and its policies. Until then, he won't have shown Canadians that he can do anything other than act the part.

'Get real. He was acclaimed because there was no-one opposing him. You can't have a vote without alternatives to vote among. '

Except that Mr. Ignatieff was appointed leader even before the closing date for signing up for the leadership contest.

Ignatieff was appointed leader on December 10, 2008. Liberals considering running for the leadership still had more than another month to consider signing up for the race. But of course that opportunity was snatched away from them.

John Hertz
from Canada writes:
Very well played by Mr. Ignatieff. Harper has been put on notice and on stage for all the Canadian people to see. Harper now owns this complete mess

The Coalition has been very effective in forcing Harper to react and Ignatieff has distanced very tactfully himself from the NDP and the Bloc.

Harper has lost his political ideology and now no one knows what the Conservative represents,

I suspect we will see an election early next year and in the intermin, the Liberal Party will have time to rebuild and reorganize, and the Liberal Party will be elected and return the country to fiscal responsibility.

BlahBlah Blogger
from Canada writes:
Iggy wants to be PM himself someday, legitimately. The best way to make that happen is by continuing to let the Cons shoot themselves in the foot over and over during these tough economic times. NOT by joining forces with the NDP and Bloc in some ill-conceived coalition. Yes, I know he would 'technically' be PM in that coalition, but it's not the same as winning a majority of your own.

al isinwonderland
from Canada writes:
Canadian politics continues to be a bit of a joke. The budget does nothing for the middle class (as usual) other than perhaps to put a muzzel on yappin Jack Laytoon. As for the Libs they had to accept this budget because their only alternative was to produce an alternate and better budget, something they couldn't possibly do because the alternative would have had to satisfy their bed partners the socialists and separatists and therefore couldn't have been better. So now its just huff and puff.

Stan L
from Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: Auroran Bear, oh I agree that its a Liberal budget. But Ignatieff is saying now that the real, real Liberal budget would be different. I would just like him to put his cards on the table and stop being so dodgey.

Oh can we please stop trying to peddle this nonsense.....the budget is not literally a Liberal crafted budget, at the end of the day, Harper CHOSE to release this budget, CHOSE to follow a loosely liberal ideal of deficit spending and CHOSE to forgo what HE thinks is the right thing to do simply to stay in power. Harper's budget is not one that the Liberals would literally release....sheesh.

Adam Ray
from Canada writes:
Of course this is totally what was expected , The Lib's can't afford to hold another election with their finances and party in complete disarray and according to the poll's getting in bed with Jack and Gill is political suicide. So now Iggy is now trying to bully Stevie and the battle of the sandbox goes on. As for Jack and Gill there is no room for them in the sandbox at this time. Too bad Jack. There go your dreams.

Richard ay
from Picton, Canada writes:
Liberals are still flailing around like the hapless fools they have been, since the sponsorship hearings revealed what utter lack of morals this party has.Iggy has further corrupted the Liberal chanches in an election, by not immediately putting miles between his party and the Dippers, and especially the Bloc. As someone else on this list has said; 'bend over Iggy, it's your turn'.The picture in the article would appear that he already has.

Rob R
from Canada writes:
If I'm Harper I call his bluff a bit! Tell Iggy that you'll agree to his conditions providing the Liberals rescind any partnership with a coalition - the rationale - simple Canadians and Investors need to be sure that if the Government is defeated it is to call an election and give Canadians a say, not to have a government taken over by 'Mob Rule' spurred on by Taliban Jack! That way if Iggy won't bite then he'll have to help hijack this government or face Canadians on the basis of a coalition government! THat would be the 'death Knell' for the Hypogrits in Canada!

Ignatieff Press Conference--What a breath of fresh air and change from two years of audio misery.

Iggy looked very Presidential.....oops, Freudian slip.....and will hold the Harper government accountable on a quarterly basis.

He has set the table for the next election and as repeated often, the coalition is finished! Thank god the separatists are out of it!

The rule of thumb for an election set out by former GG Adrienne Clarkson, was that it would be difficult to ask Canadians to go to the polls withing 6 months. Last election October 2008, next one any time after April 2009--more likely the fall.

Poor Jack-he is on a press conference right now. A sad display of old and tired rhetoric-same ole-same ole!. Time for Jack to step down and for the Party to find a new Leader and change its brand and ugly orange colour.

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
I will say this for Ignatieff: he fulfilled my hopes and returned the Liberal party to sanity. If Layton is declaring the coalition dead then its a great day for Canada and the Liberals can now start to rebuild properly without the dead-weight of the socialists around their neck.

Now, Iggy, you just need to stop being so dodgey and develop some real policies we can look at.

T N
from Canada writes:
I'm sorry Loki, did you want another $300 million dollar election during a recession effectively delaying any stimulus package for another 6 months while Canadians continue to lose their jobs and our economy tanks? Or did you want a party with no mandate to govern to take over and again delay the stimulus package while Canadians continue to lose their jobs and our economy tanks? Sorry which option did you prefer? And if your rebuttal is any option is better than Harper . . . don't bother typing.

Mimi Williams
from Edmonton, Canada writes:
Robin Adams from Ottawa, Canada writes: Iggy just lost a golden opportunity to lay waste to the CPC.

After taping and then publically releasing an opposition caucus meeting it can only mean that any 'confidence' the CPC had went out the window. It really wouldn't matter what they put in their budget it should be voted out on a matter of principle.

The CPC isn't fit to govern.

______________________________________________

Yet the Liberals are prepared to prop him up for the 45th time in a row. Many Liberal voters will be wondering why they don't just vote Conservative, given they've just formed a coalition with them in all but name. It is quite possible that Mr. Ignatieff has just handed Mr. Harper the majority he so desperately wants.

The libs learned nothing. This is the last day Harper has to play nice because from this day on, there is no coalition. Election is the only option aside from supporting Harper. An election ruins Count Iggy of windage.

A Canadian
from Canada writes:
It is a decent stimulus budget. Kudos to the cons for finally taking on the issue and kudos to the liberals for getting on with it. Shame on Jack and the Blockheads if they vote against it. For sure, given our time of economic crisis and call to action - if Layton votes against this, he becomes catagorically irrelevant.

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
Love all the partisan spin. harper put it to Iggy, Iggy controls Harper Bla Bla Bla.Hey I'm sick of elections and just want govenment to govern. You know earn what we're paying them. Iggy did the right thing. Now let them get on with guiding Canadians through the tough times to come.

M.S. Lao
from Princeton, United States writes:
Between NDP and the Bloc, Iggy is the only one has the good sense and decency to do what is good for the country at this time of crisis. The other two only think about themselves.

Alberta Dennis Notso,redneck
from Canada writes:
I noticed on Canada AM that Jack Layton looked like he had not slept very well. Looks like his nerves are about to fail. If I didn't dislike him so much I would feel sorry for him. It's about time for the NDP to find a new leader. Iggy is playing it smart for now. Then again Harper may surprise a lot of folks and show some genuine leadership. I think he NDP will always be relagated to the back seat simply because Canadians over the years have been well informed as to how well the socialists have performed in Europe. Jack might do well to run for municipal council in a place like Iceland.

Rollie Beethoven
from Canada writes:
I will vote if I could for this deal. Certainly didnt want the three stooges running the country into the ground. Layton must be frothing at the mouth over losing an opportunity for more power.

Real Westerner
from British Columbia, Canada writes:
What does it matter what the average Canadian has to say The CLOWNS in Ottawa are ONLY interested in there OWN goals. There isnt one of them fit to run a whore house they would run it in the hole. I cant figure out why a provincial party [ Block] should have any say in the running of the federal government. Hell they dont even believe in the idea of a complete country the only reason they are there is to blackmail the rest of the country, the politians are so stupid as to even listen to them in fact if it wasn't for the dream of Quebec votes they would,nt even bother with them , but they are seduced by the thought of votes = seats.

Fuzzy Bare
from Canada writes:
Robin Adams from Ottawa, Canada writes: Iggy just lost a golden opportunity to lay waste to the CPC.

After taping and then publically releasing an opposition caucus meeting it can only mean that any 'confidence' the CPC had went out the window. It really wouldn't matter what they put in their budget it should be voted out on a matter of principle.

The CPC isn't fit to govern.

Robin Adams, you are very partisan and so wrong. If Ignateiff had decided not to support what was, in truth, a Liberal Budget, Canada would, in all probability be into another election, several months would be lost before the new government could bring in a budget. We, as in Canadians can't afford to waste the time. Canadians need help NOW! Not next summer or next fall. It takes time for budgets measures to take effect.

Ignateiff did the right thing for Canada, for the Liberal Party and for himself. It is not the time for narrow minded partisan measures. Politicians have to work together to get Canadians back to work, retraining as required, employment stabilized, etc. Ignateiff understands that, many commenters in this forum do not.

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Stan L from Canada writes: Oh can we please stop trying to peddle this nonsense.....the budget is not literally a Liberal crafted budget, at the end of the day, Harper CHOSE to release this budget, CHOSE to follow a loosely liberal ideal of deficit spending and CHOSE to forgo what HE thinks is the right thing to do simply to stay in power. Harper's budget is not one that the Liberals would literally release....sheesh. ____________

I'm not disagreeing with you. Igtnatieff wrote the notes and Harper sang the tune. Harper is acting like a Liberal and throwing money around for votes and I'm very disappointed in him. Unfortunately, that seems to work in this country.

Bill Thompson
from Calgary, Canada writes:
I listened to Mr. Ignatieff very closely. Given his statements and clearly unrealistic assessment as to where this country is in the economic scheme of things, I have lost any sense of respect I may have had for the man. For example; how can he say the deficit is the conservatives fault? How can he say the loss of jobs in this country is a result of the Harper government? Clearly statements that are completely untrue. Mr. Ignatieff is living in some kind of cloud if he believes them. >>>>>>>>>What really bothers me and insults my intelligence is that he is prepared to say these things in public with the expectation I will accept what he says at face value. >>>>>>>>>>Well I for one am fed up with being lied to for partisan purposes which is exactly what Ignatieff did in his statement, which by the way was late and disorganized as usual for Liberals these days. Time for an election and the sooner the better. PS: I bet back-room Jack-I-am-a-Taliban-lover-Layton is a tad upset…That is something at least that warms the cockles of my heart.

Arec Bardwin
from Upper Canada, Canada writes:
Awwww the poor dippers. Relagated back to the kiddie table.Poor Jack. His only shot a power for a century...squandered. No cabinet postion for private mustache. No party more irrelevant.boo hoo boo hoo

Rolling my eyes
from KW, Canada writes:
John Hertz from Canada writes: What Ignatieff is doing is letting the Conservatives hang themselves and letting the NDP and the Bloc rot on the vine as they should. Well played Mr. Ignatieff.

I agree 100%. This was a great move for the Liberals, and the best opportunity they have to rebuild.

Layton is an idiot though... if he comes out swinging against the Liberals as the article suggests, he'll kill any chance for a future partnership them. That man needs to get it through his skull... he needs Ignatieff and the Liberals far moreso than the reverse.

Steve I'm Not an Alberta Redneck
from Calgary, Canada writes:
This is probably for the best. Let the CONs 'stew in their own juices' until the recession really bites and these handouts to their friends result in no tangible benefits to Canadians.

Then Harpo can take his position on the boards of tax haven financial companies, the true beneficiaries of Con and Republican largesse.

NL Patriot
from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: Sorry, NL Patriot, you have oil now so the government-to-government welfare cheques have to end sometime.

----------

Jack this is not about Equalization payments but how the program is calculated. There were changes made to the program in the last budget and we had to accept that it was going to be like it and we did.

Now they have gone and changed it again and our province has already prepared our budget and spending over the next 3 years based on that formula. But here goes Harper again and changes it, the changes don't effect any other province but ours and everyone is alright with it.

I guess us newfies were stepping ahead of our station and need to be put back in our place before we get too smart for our own britches.

What are we supposed to do, stand up and say 'yessir misser Harper, right away sir, we are sorry for standing up for our selves sir, we won't let it happen again sir'

Hee Hoo Sai
from Canada writes:
Having parliament account for its actions is a very good thing. Lets see how the Liberals handle their role as loyal opposition. The ndp have shown their true colours. Although in theory they might have made a credable opposition in the past. Their instigation of a coup to overthrow the elected govenment has shown them to be the fiscally irresposnable self centerd nannys that they are.

Tom Poleck
from Mclure, Canada writes:
Why bother with a big deficit budget? Why not just make it legal for me to go down to the bank and take out a loan in my 9 month old son's name. Worked for my parents!

Art Vandelai
from Burlington, Canada writes:
Sorry fiscal conservatives...you've been abandoned by both the Liberals and CPC. The NDP were never on your side, which leaves only one reasonable option left (outside of Quebec)...

Clint Stevens
from Red Deer, Canada writes:
Can the Sun please set on Layton. He had his 15 minutes of fame (more like 2) and he can just go away. i am sure the majority of Canadians really do not care the verbal diarrhea that comes from his trap.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: Auroran Bear, oh I agree that its a Liberal budget. But Ignatieff is saying now that the real, real Liberal budget would be different. I would just like him to put his cards on the table and stop being so dodgey.================================================

I'm sure I don't have to tell you that being in opposition is just that.....you oppose the government.

You present your own ideas at elections....so I'd check back in about a year.

Pete H
from Canada writes:
I wonder what ever made the NDP and the Boc think the liberals would honour a signed agreement? Can't imagine how upset the dippers must be. Now Iggy wants to prolong this power carrot for the dippers to nibble on. Does anyone expect them to go along with that?

harry oakes
from toronto, Canada writes:
ignis fatuus goes off to collect new cash with 'fig leaf' .......harpoon sent to corner with dunce hat to suck thumb.......jack sprat without any fat meanders aimlessly......and gilles keeps his cards for next hand......while parliament sits for 15th day in last 6 months

The Money Ain't For Nothing
from Toronto, Canada writes:
This is an interesting senario. You have the conseratives caving into and delivering a liberal budget. To add insult to injury, you will have Harper & Jimbo standing up in HOC and updating Iggy on a monthly basis like 2 school boys and if Iggy gives them a failing grade they are expelled and sent home to mommy. Do you think that if Harper had the chance to relive his November 27 economic statement he migth do it differently? Even jack L projects a better leadership positioning than those 2. This is better than air farce.

kotter 49
from Canada writes:
Considering the Canadian press's obsession with everything American including front page stories on Mrs. Obama's dress, the Americans have reciprocated with zero coverage of our budget. We are still the little mouse to the north with the dirty oil.

Ian Henderson
from Toronto, Canada writes:
In enterprise of budget kind,When there was any fighting,Iggy led the Liberals from behind(He found it less exciting).But when away the Liberals ran,His place was at the fore, O-That celebrated,Cultivated,UnderratedLatest joke,Never PM to his sorrow!

Brian Ch
from Canada writes:
Clearly Ignatieff ties the Liberals to this budget once he supports it, weasel words aside. If Ignatieff does not support the budget, simply don't allow it to pass. The Liberals need to choose as they cannot have it both ways. The amount of the deficit is simply too large and Canada should not plan for a deficit once the economy has recovered, presumably in late 2009 or 2010. This is not an exceptional circumstance like the Great Depression where our GDP dropped by 40%, not remained flat.

kotter 49
from Canada writes:
Art Vandelai from Burlington, Canada writes: Sorry fiscal conservatives...you've been abandoned by both the Liberals and CPC. The NDP were never on your side, which leaves only one reasonable option left (outside of Quebec)...-----------------------------------------------------------What?

John Connor
from Canada writes:
Tom Poleck from Mclure, Canada writes: Why bother with a big deficit budget? Why not just make it legal for me to go down to the bank and take out a loan in my 9 month old son's name. Worked for my parents! -----------------------------------------No Tom, they borrowed in my name as well. Remember that when you are choosing their nursing home. Not because you are sore at them, but becuse you get to pay for it as well.

Johnny Test
from Pork Belly, Canada writes:
Art Vandelai from Burlington, Canada writes: Sorry fiscal conservatives...you've been abandoned by both the Liberals and CPC. The NDP were never on your side, which leaves only one reasonable option left (outside of Quebec)...

Crazy Canuck
from Canada writes:
I love the infighting amongst Canadians. Canadians in general have no clue on how our political system works and who is really in charge. Deficit spending will not work. Long term we will be paying down the interest on the debt and in turn enrich the elitist and International bankers.

Fools...all political parties are corrupt and have no soul. Wake up to the truth that we live in a corporate welfare system.

Beavis Swackhammer
from Talking Softly but ..., writes:
Brian Ch from Canada writes: Clearly Ignatieff ties the Liberals to this budget once he supports it, weasel words aside. If Ignatieff does not support the budget, simply don't allow it to pass. The Liberals need to choose as they cannot have it both ways.

=================

Actually, that's the beauty of it -- they do get to have it both ways.

Steve C
from Vancouver, Canada writes:
Its too bad the Liberals are broke and cannot afford an election fight otherwise there'll be an election again. Thats what basically is Iggy's and the Libs position and nothing more.As for Jack, would someone tell him to shut up! The NDP will never ever get power and he knows it and a Coalition is the only way the NDP will get some semblence of power in Canada. NDP in power....yikes!!!!!!!!!!!

elizabeth vann
from victoria, b.c., Canada writes:
I've been watching this Ignatieff guy, closely. Seems to me he's got a mighty inflated ego. Blaming all of Canada's economic woes on the Conservative government of the past two years is delusional.

Hope this old, old man grows up and stops lecturing us in his oh, so, professorial way.

Glynn W
from Canada writes:
Harper should just call Iggy's bluff because it is obvious that the Lib don't want power right now (who would?). Forced into either taking power and possibly failing to revive the economy or backing Harper...we'd all see that none of the political parties have the heart for this situation except maybe for the NDP who wants to rule, good or bad....which again is not necessarily a good thing. Hard thing this democracy!

p lailey
from vancouver, Canada writes:
Ignatieff made the right move supporting the budget. I will also give him credit for having more political smarts than Dion. What I find hilarious is how after listening for years to Liberals blasting Harper for being arrogant, playing political games, and for being a Bush lover you now line up squarely behind Ignatieff and cheer the same attributes.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
pole cat from Canada writes: Auroran Bear if you would look into things before you go off at the face you would know that bush sr and jr served there full terms before being replaced.Meaning they are only allowed 8 years,silly lefties lol. ================================================

You may want to replace the Fisher Price History books. Bush senior was President for 4 years. He got knocked down by 'It's the economy stupid'.

And ask W and McCain how the economy worked for the GOP as incumbent candidates.

Ignatieff Press Conference--What a breath of fresh air and change from two years of audio misery.

Iggy looked very Presidential.....oops, Freudian slip.....and will hold the Harper government accountable on a quarterly basis. _____________________________________________

Afternoon, RC. Thank heaven for Ignatieff and it's about time that our government be held accountable, especially since it's a ''MINORITY'' government.

But still, what a strange, crazy world of politics... While in the US, the Republicans are balking at the Democrats, here in Canada, it's the other way around. Very happy that Mr. Ignatieff is in charge of the opposition. Breath of fresh air indeed! Looked ''presidential'' indeed...oh well, sometimes when I look at our minority Prime Minister, I am reminded of the ''Empire Austro-Hongrois''... our minority government seems to be more Empire than .... (fill in the blanks)...democracy

JP Warwick
from Canada writes:
Auroran Bear 'Thanks because Harper doesn't have the ability to sell a budget that doesn't include massive spending? Or the ability to win a majority?' Harper was forced to open the taps. Not saying some of it isn't warranted but there's plenty in there on the spending side which is appalling and only there because of the libs. Harper now also has the excuse in the next election of saying the 'libs made me do it' As for Majorities, don't think you'll be seeing one of those for a long time. This coalition has shown QC that electing the Bloc pays and so you can expect more of the same. Sans QC, Harper has a majority. It will be near impossible for any government to get a majority while QC is either part of Canada or has rejected the Bloc. Neither is likely to change any time soon. Consequently, Harper badly over-played his hand last fall. Iggy just over-played his now. In Harper's case, he should never have backed the opposition into a corner then poked at them. You corner a nasty beast and the nasty beast will attack. In Iggy's case, his leverage ends today but he's grandstanded far beyond his ability to back it up and in such a way as to make even the cold Harper look soft. He looked pompous and arrogant when he should have been likeable (although maybe impossible for him) or at least reasonable. He just looked smug. No one likes that (except partisans.)

Seasoned Warrior
from Been down so long it looks like up to me, Canada writes:
Yeah! The right decision and the right budget for the times. This will look good on both Ignatieff and Harper. Someone direct Jack Layton to the ice floe. He can take Duceppe with him for company.

Careful Reader
from North of the US Border and loving it, Canada writes:
This was the only reasonable move Mr. Ignatieff could do, and he did it well. The coalition would go nowhere, and an election now would serve no purpose. Mr. Ignatieff had to clean up the mess left by Dion (i.e. the coalition) and get over December's the political turmoil. Now the Harper government is loosing ground and it's just a matter of waiting to trigger an election when the liberals are ready.

Well done Mr. Ignatieff, you have already proven you have more common sense than Mr. Dion ever had. If you keep using it, you will be a fine Prime Minister this fall or next year.

mike h
from Canada writes:
The Liberals support the budget - simple as that. By voting for it, they endorse it. Lucky the GG gave them the chance to step back, think about things, and do this. Hopefully they will never be so stupid as to abandon the centre again.

Anyone but Ignatieff; Rae and LeBlanc. or Duceppe for the new Liberal Leader.
from Canada writes:
The thing I notice about Inatieff is that he is more interested in his feud with PM Haper then he is with what's best for Canada. PM Harper will agree to these changes as Ignatieff can do nothing to enforce the reports. It very childish behavior on the Toronto Liberal leaders part.

Dale Kennedy
from Prince George, Canada writes:
Can somebody please take Layton out behind the woodshed. He keeps talking about 'co-operation' but by publicly declaring he'd reject the budget long before he ever saw it he clearly indicates he has zero interest in co-operating with anybody. He knows he'll never get to power so the next best thing was to be Mini-Me to Ignatieff in a coalition. Hands up anybody who ever thought the coalition would last longer than 3 months before imploding.

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
NL Patriot, I apologise. I was out-of-touch on those changes. I see that Newfoundland has been capped.

I don't disagree with the change per se. However, I do believe that such a change should be communicated well in advance.

I will say that I have lived in 4 provinces across the country and every single one of them thought that they were being screwed by the government. Punish the Conservatives by all means (Alberta certainly has a hate on for the Liberals) but Newfoundland isn't being singled out.

Hugh 78
from Canada writes:
Steve C from Vancouver, Canada writes: As for Jack, would someone tell him to shut up! The NDP will never ever get power and he knows it and a Coalition is the only way the NDP will get some semblence of power in Canada. NDP in power....yikes!!!!!!!!!!!

_____________________________________________________________________

I seriously don't get how anyone can vote NDP...

A party whose consistent mandate is to spend money now and put the obligations on future generations is a joke IMHO...

Rolling my eyes
from KW, Canada writes:
Bravo Donald Patterson... that is possibly the dumbest thing I've read here today. The Liberals are doing exactly what they have the authority and power to do in a minority parliament with a weak, grasping government where they hold the balance of power.

ernie sorochan
from vegreville, Canada writes:
Good idea by the Liberals with the accountability check. Too often governments at all levels give out money which never gets to where it is supposed to go. I am worried about how the provinces and local governments are going to use this money. I have seen local governments spend more money on consulting and administration then they do on actual projects.

Good point made that this is how a minority government should work.All of us would like something different in a budget. I do not know if this one will work, but there are many other countries who are worse off the us.

I am not a Harper fan, but I am disappointed in the name calling by a few of the commentators concerning all the leaders. This does not make any comment more persuasive or meaningful.

Chris Epp
from Penticton, Canada writes:
The title of this article really should be...Liberals Forced to Support Conservatives! And the opening line should read.....The Liberals, having taken inventory of their political capital, had no choice but to recognize that they had been out maneuvered by the Conservatives and would have to support their budget. Their leader, Mr. Ignatiaff, put on a brave front, but in reality he was selecting a nice fat crow for his evening meal. Perhaps he and Mr. Harper should dine together. Good government sometimes appears when both parties are operating from a humbled position.

john 'trillium boy' smith
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Mr. Flaherty said it bothers him to run deficits, but it's the right thing to do. “I'm a fiscal conservative,&8221; he said. &8220;It troubles me to run deficits.&8221;

Tom Thumb
from Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: Auroran Bear, oh I agree that its a Liberal budget. But Ignatieff is saying now that the real, real Liberal budget would be different. I would just like him to put his cards on the table and stop being so dodgey.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Please stop spreading these lies. This is not a liberal budget. The liberals ran 11 years of consecutive budget surpluses, even under tough economic times.

This is a conservative budget, tabled by a conservative Prime Minister. Conservatives have done this to Ontario, now they are doing it to all of Canada.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
Neil Garret from Canada writes: Full disclosure. I am a CONSERVATIVE and despise left wing people, politics and philosophy. I mean despise.=================================================

Jack Coulas
from Brantford, Canada writes:
Finally we have some semblance of order in our country and the biggest loser is/will be JACK LAYTON - could not happen to a more deserving person. Remember folks how he had his beady little eyes on power; power he would never win at the polls, remember how his mentor, Ed Broadbent, was celebratiing, prematurely as it turned out, that the NDP would finally have a seat at the table of power. Poof!!!!!!!!! All gone.

Remember also the words of Layton to Harper at the press conference announcing HIS coalition - eat them now Jackie boy!! Jack thought he was a union leader closing another company for not giving into his outrageous demands. I hope that we have seen the end of this treacherous deceitful person.

The timing of the spending in this budget may allow us to avoid a large portion of the deficit if the economy improves quickly in the last part of 2009. Given the times, not a bad budget, and really we are only borrowing back the monies we had paid down on our national debt over the past several years - so we have some elbow room in the nation's finances.

bob crier
from Toronto, Canada writes:
I voted CPC in the last election, but was really disappointed with their actions of the past few months. I have to say that I am impressed with Liberals decision to support the budget, ask for more transperancy and and work with CPC. This saves the country from another election or worse us having to accept a marriage of conenience between Liberals and NDP. Kudos to Ignatieff for making the right decision. As far as Jack Layton is concerned, he is an angry old man and he will always be. His true agenda was visible right from the begining.

James Hinnecke
from Pickering, ON, Canada writes:
Members of the 'at issue' panel on cbc last night noted that this budget would have conceptually been right at home during the trudeau years of the 1970s. That being the case, it's really a liberal budget and the transformation of the conservatives from 'reform/pc' to a liberal clone is virtually complete. Along the way, virtually every other thing reform once stood for has gone by the wayside. It's the price Mr Harper has paid for power and one day the tories will realize this and take their revenge.

Moreover: both Layton and duceppe seemed to be desperate to bring down the government, since they were prepared to vote against the budget sight unseen. At least appear to consider it! I don't think that having such inflexible people as part of your coalition would have sent a very encouraging signal. Good riddance.

CEH Vancouver
from Vancouver, Canada writes:
Too bad Uncle Jack.....you were soooo close to real power, now you can trust Iggy....and Iggy watching CPC on the economy....give me a break....add something to the budget, add value... all you are doing is running scared, if an election were held in the next 60 - 120 days, all things would remain the same, perhaps the CPC would increase seats at the expense of the NDP.....if the LPC can not manage their own party how will they manage the economy....what ever happen to S Doin.....is he still kicking around?

Claudia Burt
from Toronto, Canada writes:
By not amending EI the federal government is downloading again.Social assistance payments will skyrocketThis and the matching payments for infrastructur projects will keep Ontario and Toronto 'HAVE NOTS' long after the federal budget is balanced again

Dude, where's my Canada?
from Canada writes:
The NDP are the only party left with credibility. Unlike the other parties, they haven't reversed themselves at every opportunity to pander. They're not perfect, but they make sense and stand up for the little guy whereas the others are eager to give out corporate welfare.

Since everyone's a 'socialist' now, maybe we should elect someone who actually understands the concepts.

Yvonne Wackernagel
from Woodville, Canada writes:
It is unfortunate that Harper had to show his nasty disposition by depleting the transfers to Quebec and Newfoundland & Labrador. He realizes that they caused him to miss out on his majority and will again, so he is revengeful; Shame, shame.

He barely made the cut with Ignatieff who, in my opinion, made the right decision. However, he has Harper where he wants him and now the Liberals will really run the show.

I would have liked to see Harper go down for the main reason of accountability because I do not believe that we are seeing the true picture of his books. Like the 60% of Canadians, I DO NOT TRUST HARPER.

John Longshot
from Canada writes:
In truth, Danny Williams is an NDP hack, all dressed up in 'conservative' clothes. His political ideologies are anathema to good government. He is an arrogant bombastic idiot who has become irrelevant in the broader context of Canadian politics.

The Money Ain't For Nothing
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: NL Patriot, I apologise. I was out-of-touch on those changes. I see that Newfoundland has been capped.

I don't disagree with the change per se. However, I do believe that such a change should be communicated well in advance

but Newfoundland isn't being singled out.

If you agree with the change, and that Newfoundland is not being singled out, a perhaps you can support this with the logic and rationale supporting your conclusion given Newfoundland is the only province being impacted.

Robin M
from Canada writes:
Ignatieff is the only adult in the room... At this point, he knew he had no choice but to support this budget because of the Worldwide economic crisis and the instability another election could bring. However his support came with conditions and amendments.

In effect, there is a sense that Ignatieff is now in charge and Harper must keep the promises he made in the budget, some of which are good things.. But Harper is greatly diminished by this and the future of the Conservative party is in doubt.

Jack Layton is upset and Gille Duceppe is not surprised by Ignatieff's position and infact they both wanted to bring down Stephen Harper because they can't trust him, but also in the case of Jack Layton, the coalition would have been a political cue for him. So Stephen Harper's only friend is Ignatieff who like a stern teacher is putting him on probation..

We will have to wait and see how long much longer this government lasts, or if Harper accepts the amendments made by Ignatieff.

Meanwhile the media is lapping all this stuff up, feeding on the theatre and on the divisions which has always been Harper's way of governing in the first place...

Orville Murphy
from Canada writes:
Danny Williams is starting to sound a lot like Jack...anybody but Harper and damn the consequences. Jack, your ship is sinking, do the honorable thing and go down with it.

Raymond P
from Canada writes:
Danny Williams crying for funding because oil revenues are drying up. Oh boo hoo Dan. Try catching some fish instead of begging for handouts from Ottawa. Fish dried up too eh? Maybe you can give every Newfoundlanders a plane ticket to Alberta. Then have them send their pay back and tax it. This ought to keep you in the black.

Consider this - if money is approved by the House for spending on programs, that does not mean the gov't HAS to spend it. The gov't merely has PERMISSION to spend it.

This is something the NDP in particular has been complaining about. The CPC have some large program funding accounts which have not been tapped 100% (probably for good reasons such as approvals and management overhead).

Tax cuts, however, take effect and the gov't is forced to eat those costs.

Anyways, it is possible that Harper has considered this. Show the opposition what they want to see but then play it cool and carefully when it comes to actually opening the flood gates to release the funds.

Steve D
from Canada writes:
All these idiots on here that prefer a coalition government with a Separatist Party pulling the stings along with Jack Layton who is never happy--- give your heads a good shake-- chances are you may hear something rattling upstairs !!!

p lailey
from vancouver, Canada writes:
Ok, now that that's over we should erect a statute in honour of our GG for having the courage to stop the coalition from taking power. Prime Minister Stephane Dion anyone?

D Le5
from Canada writes:
So are the images of Jim hanging out with his 'common man' buddies at Tim Hortons really convincing anyone that he is a man of the people??? I guess there is a small group of die hard CPCers that think this means he understand them and cares. Wanna bet he sips his Starbucks lattes at the office?

golfer golfer
from Canada writes:
Layton says one of the reasons he can't support the budget is the lack of accountability but he won't support an amendment designed to provide the accountability we need. Great thinking Jack, it scares the hell out of me to think we almost had you sitting as government minister!!

Al Gorman
from Canada writes:
Neither Layton nor Duceppe understand strategy very well. The coalition died with Stephan Dion. That was very clear. Ignatieff will not compromise his future chances at becoming prime minister by entering into the coalition arrangement. The budget ammendment was prdeictable however it is hard to udnerstand why the Liberal leader did not demostrate a little testicular fortitude and require more than regular reporting in the ammendment. He could have successfully tackled the EI accessibility issue and surfaced as the victor in this scenario. The limpness of his proposed ammendment is an indicator that his opposition approach will depart very little from that of his predecessor. Look for a nonconfidence vote later this year. The House of Commons is destined to yet another dysfunctional sitting following passage of the budget.

aging oldtool
from Canada writes:
This is a short revised post first sent a half hour ago and apparently the victim of a crack in the Globe's firewall that diverted it to the censor's bin.

Iggy is doing just as expected, coming to the rescue of the status quo and publicly running away from his coalition partners.

Of course Iggy will support Harper's budget as it pretty much reflects what the two old line parties wanted.

Lots of tax cuts for the wealthy.

One can't expect too much being 'given away' to the needy as those voters don't represent what Iggy or Harper stand for.

Iggy, just back from self-imposed exile from Canada for 30 years, is still a player in the same-old, same-old political game in Canada that sees Liberals become Conservative and vice-versa when the need arises.

Can't leave to chance those other parties that might actually redistribute Canada's wealth in a manner that would actually help people.

No, this game is about doing as little as possible while ensuring the wealthy get tax breaks to more than compensate should their loose change spills from their pockets.

My,my, how things change in 58 days....or was that just a bad dream? Nightmare?

December 1 2008:

OTTAWA - The extraordinary prospect of Canada changing governments without an election took a big step closer to reality Monday.

The fractious Liberals agreed to support a tentative deal with the NDP - backed by the Bloc Quebecois - to form a coalition government with Stephane Dion as interim prime minister.

'We've decided that the only person and the best person to lead and form a coalition government is the elected leader of our party ... Stephane Dion,' said Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc, flanked by his two leadership rivals in a show of solidarity. .

Pete H
from Canada writes:
elizabeth vann from victoria, b.c., Canada writes: I've been watching this Ignatieff guy, closely. Seems to me he's got a mighty inflated ego. Blaming all of Canada's economic woes on the Conservative government of the past two years is delusional.

Hope this old, old man grows up and stops lecturing us in his oh, so, professorial way.

Probation? How childish and elitist at the same time.

Thats what makes him the perfect candidate for the liberal party of Canada

TERRI R
from Kimberley, Canada writes:
theremnant..your comment about bank statement is from JP Morgan during the 30s depression, ever since then banks have gotten more and more control. This statement should be front and center as a testiment that this financial debacle is indeed ....a deliberate manipulation...it is an endeavour to get a worldwide monetary system, and what to base it on,until all countries around the world are bankrupt we will see no change, in this deliberate financial debacle, it is now a fight to see what country our new worldwide monetary system will be based on.

No Party party
from VanCity, Canada writes:
The matching of municipal, provincial funds is retarded - it will slow things down to a trickle. Increasing 5 weeks of EI is way too little, AND a 1350 tax credit for home renos is going to do lots when nobody has money to burn. At least everyone can see Harper has abandoned all his principles to try and keep his job. I like the benchmarking Iggy has proposed, now we will actually be able to guage his actions (inactions), whatever, adds a tangible measure anyways.

Bill Hopkins
from London, Canada writes:
In the immediate future I think Iggy's position makes sense. I just hope Harper doesn't screw this up. In the longer term, I agree that Iggy has done the assesment, knows that the Liberals can not mount an effective campaign at this time (we need money and gottat get organized) and so this is only a delaying tactic. Yes I expect an election in the late summer/ Spetember.

I just wish Layton whould sut up and go away. Jack, you are not relevant. Go back to your subsidized housing and leave the politics to the big boys -- or better yet, grow a goatee and move to Russia where you can get a job as a Lenin-lookalike.

Derek Holota
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Mr. Ignatieff has made the right decision here. I supported the NDP in the last election, however, since Jack Layton has got on the coalition train, he's become more close-minded than Stephen Harper. Understanding that the coalition is the only way he will advance his political career, Jack Layton is putting his personal success over the needs of the Canadian people. Of course this budget is not perfect, its Harper and Flaherty, but now is not the time for an election and it does provide sufficient stimulus for the economy at this time. Ignatieff is playing this perfectly, the Prime Minister knows he cannot push the new Liberal leader around like he did with Dion, and he knows he has to listen to him. Just look at the budget. By allowing the budget to pass in exchange for regular updates on how the government is proceeding with its promises makes the Conservatives trully accountable to the Opposition.

david sandford
from Canada writes:
Mr. Flaherty said it bothers him to run deficits, but it's the right thing to do. “I'm a fiscal conservative,” he said. “It troubles me to run deficits.” It's unfortunate that Mr. Flaherty must have been deeply troubled for most of his political life in Ontario...

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
Having decided to become that which we decry, the editors of the Con Attack Policy Manual would like you to turn to page 122. Please discontinue use of the phrase 'Massive Program Spending' to attack our opponents. Also on page 48 please discontinue use of the phrase 'Fiscal Conservative' to describe our economic approach to governance.

All future versions of the manual will be committed to memory as they are highly susceptible to change!

Tom Thumb
from Canada writes:
Bill Thompson from Calgary, Canada writes: I listened to Mr. Ignatieff very closely. Given his statements and clearly unrealistic assessment as to where this country is in the economic scheme of things, I have lost any sense of respect I may have had for the man. For example; how can he say the deficit is the conservatives fault?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well Bill, it's pretty easy to say this. The conservatives cut the GST, increase government spending dramatically and bailed out the banks(75 billion).

Logic is full of Epic Win
from Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: Sorry, NL Patriot, you have oil now so the government-to-government welfare cheques have to end sometime. And you have no idea what its like to be hated by a major political party. For years the Liberals told Alberta that they would screw them for not electing any MPs. When Edmonton voted in a few Liberals but Calgary did not, the Liberals closed CFB and moved its operations to Edmonton. Posted 28/01/09 at 12:04 PM EST -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A partisan mis-interpretation of events. On the surface, you are right that the 1996 Federal budget announced the closure of CFB Calgary and that most of its personnel was relocated to CFG Edmonton. However, this cannot be layed at the feet of the Liberals. CFB manpower assessments were ordered/done in 1989-90, 3 years before the Liberals were elected to a majority. How do I know? My father performed them. CFB Calgary, amongst others, could not substantiate their staffing numbers with work done, and recommendations to close/move personnelle to justified workloads was completed early in 1992 by the Forces, and then submitted to Parliament for approval. The PC did not act on the cost saving measures, but the LPC did in the 1996 budget. End of story.

Should change your name to lame aging '60's hippy. You're way left of stupid if you think what tax cuts are in the budget are for the rich. If you make more than a huge 10 grand a year, you're getting tax cuts.

They're targeted to everyone who makes less than 80k a year. Them ain't the rich, boy.

The rest is all very US Republican measures such as EI benefits and subsidized housing.

You have got to be either really, really, misinformed or bone, stump-stupid.

C TC
from Toronto, Canada writes:
I have to say that I am proud the some of the Canadian politicians have heard President Obama's call to 'put aside childish ways'. Mr. Ignatieff & Premier McGuinty are behaving like leaders today. Just as Bob Rae stepped aside for Mr. Ignatieff, Mr. Ignatieff is doing the right thing for the moment. I have hope for the first time since all this partisan politics began - - that the elected leaders will ask 'What is in the best interests of all Canadians' and stop asking 'What can I do to score a political win today'.

Diogenes the Cynic
from Canada writes:
For the time being Ignatieff is in the driver's seat. Harper has delivered essentially a liberal, Keynsian budget. If it goes well, Ignatieff can claim that it was the threat of the coalition that made him do it. If it doesn't, Ignatieff can say that the Conservatives are incompetent. Most importantly he can bring down the government whenever it suits him.

Matt M
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Iggy never wanted the coalition and only supported it to show unity. It's his party now and good for him for supporting this budget. Is it perfect? Far from it. But do the majority of the Canadians want an election over it? Absolutely not. Vote this down and we get an election, not a coalition. It's pretty easy for Layton and the Bloc to pull their support when their view is from the cheap seats. It's about recovering from this mess of an economy, not the NDP gaining their first chance at political power.

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: Peter Griffin from Quahog, Canada writes: Time for Harper to call Iggy's bluff. Will Iggy vote down the budget, does he have the fortitude? Not likely.

Exactly. The ball is in Harper's court. -----------------------------------------------------------------------Catherine you are right and as a conservative what I want is for Harper to stop the games and work with the liberals on helping all Canadians. I want to see a conservative majority someday and it will never happen unless Harper stops playing games. I know you don't agree with my hope for a conservative majority but I think we can agree that the game playing must stop and this is a first step.

Garibaldi III from TO
from Canada writes:
Spencer C from Canada writes: So basically Iggy just handed the gun to Harper and said 'Your turn'.

Requiring periodic status reports is reasonable, requiring status reports which would trigger additional confidence votes is ridiculous, I can't see Harper agreeing to that, nor is it a good thing for stability in Canada.------Harper is running out of pawns..... another prorogue maybe??

Tor Hill Sask.
from Canada writes:
Mr. Layton had his chance to do the right thing in 2005-6. That is the time he could have decided to throw his lot in with the Liberals instead of the current minority government. Now whoever might have thought that a left-of-centre party like the NDP might hold some power over a far right-wing group like the Harper-led minority government? Mr. Layton was outfoxed by Mr. Harper in thinking that he might usurp the Liberals. Hey, both the CPC and the NDP want to usurp the Liberals! What a scenario. Anyway, I say, Mr. Ignatieff did the best thing under the circumstances. We've already had a good taste of accountability, CPC-style; let's have just a few more tastes of it.

Harold Uhlman
from Lunenburg, NS, writes:
Forcing an election at this time simply would not have been wise with the economy struggling. Getting a coalition to work would have been difficult and costly in terms of time. Many of the same measures would have been included in a coalition budget. For the Liberal party it seems best to sever ties with the coalition. It also seems best to allow the Conservatives to wear this recession and defeat them as we are coming out of it. As a Liberal I am disappointed in Mr. Ignatieff's plan announced today. First, who in their right minds expect the Conservatives to truly give honest updates? Nothing they do is open and transparent. I don't see this as much of a concession. Secondly, it seems Mr. Ignatieff could have made some inroads for the unemployed and the party by working an EI ammendment that would have been difficult for the Conservatives not to accept. I know the difficulties with different provincial EI plans but it certainly would have caught the attention of the nation. Thirdly, Mr.Ignatieff pointed out what he perceived as the many flaws in the budget and then accepted it without ammendment. It is a bit difficult to follow that line of reasoning. I guess the reason is that ammendments take time and time is of the essence in implmenting the budget provissions.

Beavis Swackhammer
from Talking Softly but ..., writes:
Greg Out West from Canada writes: Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: Peter Griffin from Quahog, Canada writes: Time for Harper to call Iggy's bluff. Will Iggy vote down the budget, does he have the fortitude? Not likely.

Exactly. The ball is in Harper's court. -----------------------------------------------------------------------Catherine you are right and as a conservative what I want is for Harper to stop the games and work with the liberals on helping all Canadians. I want to see a conservative majority someday and it will never happen unless Harper stops playing games.

Tom Thumb
from Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: Tom Thumb, are you suggesting that the Liberals would have balanced the budget? Seriously?

Or are you saying that they would have a few billion more dollars to work with because they wouldn't have spent the money last year on increased health and social transfers and GST cuts?

Because if you look at Martin, he was spending money like mad to fight off the Conservatives. It may have been spent on different things but much or most of that money would have been spent anyway.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That's exactly what I'm saying. The Liberals were running decent surpluses until the conservatives took power and cut the GST, increased spending dramatically!! and bailed out the banks. All of which shouldn't have happenned, so that when the economy trully tanked there would be a lot more money available to deal with the problems. Balanced budgets only. Everthing else is robbing from my children.

Garibaldi III from TO
from Canada writes:
NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Dan Shortt from Toronto, Canada writes: I have a feeling that when the next federal election occurs that Mr Williams is going to take his ABC campaign all across this country and I for one can't wait.----Danny could start a 'none of the above' party ..... and probably win.:-)

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
The Money Ain't For Nothing, British Columbia, I read, has been affected by the change as well.

And the reason I don't disagree with the change is that its unfair that provinces would get equalization that would allow it to provide better services per capita than those provinces (Ontario) that provide the equalization.

T. M.
from Edmonton, Canada writes:
Ignatieff has to see some better poll numbers before he'll risk an election. The liberals literally cannot afford to spend money in another election right now - especially one that would likely produce a liberal, or even another con, minority.

Why bother?

Besides, for all Canadians, under Iggie's leadership, the Liberal party has taken a big step to the right. The party should at least change their name to the Newest Little Kinda Conservative Party. For example, an Ignatieff Liberal majority government would likely do O'bomb'em's bidding and extend Canada's Afghanistan military involvement and probably jump on the US's warwagon, whenever and wherever it rolls next, while Steivie's New, Less-Conservative Party of Canada will have at least a modicum difficulty breaking their promise that Canada will leave Afghanistan 'by' 2011 or 2012.

Something else. Do you think that Stevie will continue his tradition of having frequent confidence votes, as he did while Dion was at the liberal helm? With liberal poll numbers remaining anywhere near the cons, the next confidence vote willalmost certainly be the NEXT budget.

Unless the banking system tanks, or nobody's willing to exchange their hard-earned money for Canadian government IOU's, look forward to a very calm year in Canadian federal politics.

D Wiatzka
from Canada writes:
Tom Thumb - Yes the liberals did have surpluses during the years when times were good, but that was largely thanks to the GST and NAFTA, both products of the Mulroney gov't.

Consider this legacy of the Liberals. There has only been one time since world war two that a 'structural deficit' was CREATED in Canada.

As document by the G&Ms article yesterday, that structural deficit was created in 1974 by the Trudeau gov't. Those structural deficits peaked with the last Trudeau/MacEachen budget for the fiscal year 1984/1985.

The structural deificts continued but immediately began receding with the first Mulroney/Wilson budget, introduced in May 1985. It was finally the GST and NAFTA which hoisted our patoots out of the structural deficit mess after the recession of the early 1990s.

Only thing Chretien/Martin did to add to that was download programs to the provinces while capping funding for those programs. That made things even better for the feds but worse for the provinces.

Catherine Wilkie
from Canada writes:
Greg Out West from Canada: 'Catherine you are right and as a conservative what I want is for Harper to stop the games and work with the liberals on helping all Canadians.'

Tom Flanagan thinks that Harper does not have someone close to him, and brave enough, to ignore his petty pouts.

Andrew Coyne believes that Harper has lost his stature as a 'transformative figure' to the Conservative movement.

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
Beavis Swackhammer from Talking Softly but ..., writes: -----------------------------------------------------------------------Catherine you are right and as a conservative what I want is for Harper to stop the games and work with the liberals on helping all Canadians. I want to see a conservative majority someday and it will never happen unless Harper stops playing games.

=================

You need to be looking for a new leader, if that's your dream. --------------------------------------------------------I don't disagree but if he wont step down then he has to clean up his act.

L M87
from Calgary, Canada writes:
So somebody explain this to me. We are deficit spending yet we are cutting taxes at the same time. They told us last time they cut taxes that they cut it right up to the line of fiscal balance and that was during good economic times. So are you not creating a deficit with this tax cut? Since we're ignoring fiscal responsibility, we'll make it as blatant as possible? Is that the plan? This is our crisis, let's not pass the buck onto our own children.

And what happens if things get worse or take longer to recover? I see the numbers from that IMF report and it's not good and also demonstrate that forecasts change and have been changing for the worse. Am I going to see Jim Flaherty standing on a street corner in a Santa suit, ringing a bell to raise money?

Just look at the wealth destruction in the US. It all started when the US cut taxes and coupled it with heavy spending. They printed money, rates went down, housing market went up, more money printed secured against assets that were inflated... then, boom! Economics 101 folks. Those smart enough to see it coming got rich. The rest of us that accepted what we were told just took it in the gut.

henk gal
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Very smart and reasonable move on the part of the Liberal Opposition, considering the circumstances we find ourselves in. So Harper will be held accountable, a very good thing since everybody knows (or should know by now) that Harper can't be trusted, that for Harper it's all about votes, votes, votes (and trying to wipe out the Liberals along the way).So, let's see how the implementation of this budget works out, and how the new coalition (the conservatives, supported and held accountable by the Liberals) will work out.I wish them all the luck they will need.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
Uncle Fester from Canada writes:It seems the Liberals will get into bed with whoever they think will advance their position the most on any given day. You know the old saying, politics makes strange bed fellows.

===============================================

Yeah the only analogy that works better is that of a purported fiscally conservative PM who says he was forced to put out a Trudeau era budget just to stay in power.

Garibaldi III from TO
from Canada writes:
Mary Anne Divjak from Toronto, Canada writes: How absolutely ridiculous! A Prime Minister of a country being put on probation by a leader of the opposition who wasn't even properly elected by the members of his own party.------Yep! that's a great move for a chess grandmaster!:-)

Jason Roy
from Central Nova - After October 14th AKA STILL Peter Mackay Country, Canada writes:
Garibaldi III from TO from Canada writes: NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Dan Shortt from Toronto, Canada writes: I have a feeling that when the next federal election occurs that Mr Williams is going to take his ABC campaign all across this country and I for one can't wait.----Danny could start a 'none of the above' party ..... and probably win.:-)

Tiberius Oderint dum probent
from Canada writes:
Jack has left the playground and taking his ball home. Gilles is organizing the French class students that they must vote for the class and not for the betterment of the entire school. The intellectual is pointing at the school yard bully as a rally cry that he's not going to take it anymore. Good grief, the writers are This Hour has 22 Minutes must be salivating at all this material.

Bill L
from Canada writes:
Lack of Leadership once again on the Liberal side. 'On Probation'? or just the fact they will know they will lose if an election is called. A couple of quick ideas for iggy (just for debate, please don't take a stand Dion, I mean Iggy). -Force the conservatives to use the gas tax formula for funding the municipalities - get the infrastructure money flowing. -Drop the reno rebate, put that money towards more tax cuts, when you can't buy milk, you are not going to reno a bathroom. Or allow people to use that money to pay penalties to renegotiate mortgages so that they don't lose their homes. -Don't worry about manufacturing jobs, they are disappearing anyway, begin to focus tax policy (and cuts) along with more training programs to the trades and the knowledge based workers. There is a shortage of select trades now more infrastructure today without these training opportunities for more tradespeople may mean further delays.-More stimulus for the 'green' economy (including nuclear power)-Less tax on liquor and beer (oops sorry I think that's provincial - but it will help with the pain of the economy)Just something for your lecture circuit Iggy!

Tom Thumb
from Canada writes:
Brent Hodges from Waterloo, Ontario, Canada writes: Tom Thumb wrote: 'increase government spending dramatically and bailed out the banks(75 billion).' The money you refer to was used to swap insured mortgages from the banks to increase liquidity in the banking system. Those mortgages were already guaranteed by the CMHC. There is no contribution to the deficit from those transactions and no additional risk to the taxpayer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not true: Under the proposal, Ottawa plans to sell a combination of government bonds and other public debt instruments to raise the $25 billion. Then CMHC will ask the banks and other financial institutions to ascertain how much debt they would like to sell to the agency, using a process known as a reverse auction. ... Flaherty said the action would 'make loans and mortgages more available and more affordable for ordinary Canadians and businesses.'(Ibid, emphasis added) The official Ministry of Finance statement confirms that the operation will be financed by the Treasury. Prime Minister Harper claims that 'it will cost the government nothing' because the net public debt from an accounting point of view remains the same. While the operation is casually described as a transfer of assets from the banks to the CMHC, what we dealing with is a cash injection equivalent to 4.6% of Canada's Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which is financed through a massive public debt operation. May I emphasize the last 4 words:'Massive public debt operation' http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12007 Please read the entire article, it explains better than your simplistic view.

Beatriz Perez-Sanchez
from Toronto, Canada writes:
The only thing on 'probation' now is Ignatieff's leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. Because he is incapable of offering the Canadian voters a clear-cut alternative to the Conservatives, he has no choice but to let the budget pass. Unlike Stephane Dion, who was a mix of hubris and humility, the latter ingredient is totally absent from Mr. Ignatieff's character. There was never a snowball's chance in Hell that Ignatieff would entertain thoughts of power-sharing with Jack Layton or anyone else. There isn't room on the same stage for other actors when an egomaniac like Ignatieff is delivering his soliloque. In time, and probably in the very near future, more and more traditional Liberal supporters will be asking themselves if the Liberal Party really stands for anything or if it is capable of producing a leader of any substance in whom the Canadian public can have confidence. Logically, Stephen Harper should have been out of power by now. Unfortunately, he will be around a while longer, thanks both to his uncanny survival instincts (something rarely seen in a Conservative leader) and the incompetence of the federal Liberals. If Ignatieff's 'leadership' is followed by that of yet another bumbler, we may see the Conservatives become the new 'natural governing party' of Canada.

Harold K.
from Windsor, ON, Canada writes:
If I was a Con supporter, I would not be gloating about this development.

*PM Harper and his team turned their back on their principles 180 degrees, to maintain power. They adopted an essentially moderate Liberal budget.

The Opposition parties and Canadian will still be watching closely to see if the Tories actually EXECUTE these actions, and look for needed additions and refinements, including reform of EI and increased emphasis on investments in R&D, especially for sciences, green technology, and information technology. Support for the new Magna-Ford electric car partnership would also be a good idea.

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Tom Thumb, you're seriously deluding yourself that the Liberals would have done anything significantly differently. However, I sense that it would be impossible to convince of that so I won't try.

The recipients of the bank bailout are also the creditors of the federal government. The chartered banks are the brokers of the federal public debt. They sell treasury bills and government bonds on behalf of the government. They also hold a portion of the public debt..

In a bitter irony, the banks lend money to the federal government to finance the bailout, and with the money raised through the sale of government bonds and T-Bills, the government finances, via the CHMC, the bank bailout. It is a circular process. The banks are the recipients of the bailout as well as the creditors of the State. The federal government is in a sense financing its own indebtedness.

Alberta Dennis Notso,redneck
from Canada writes:
The polls show 57% of Canadians support the budget. That means 57% support the Cons. Even Iggy could figure that out. So I would suggest all the Harper haters are once again odd man out. So folks, moan and groan, you will get about as much interest as Layton. By the time there is another election, Harper will have learned what it takes to win a majority so head for your kleenex box folks. Maybe you can take up a collection for Jacky. He looked a little rough on Canada AM, guess he did not sleep very well, poor soul.

Garibaldi III from TO
from Canada writes:
Auroran Bear from Montreal, Canada writes: This is the oppositions budget because Harper didn't have the pair to introduce his own.----It's hard to keep a pair when one is intent on wanting to walk on fields littered with rakes.:-)

Penny Cillan
from Canada writes:
Well done Iggy - what gets measured gets done! Lets improve the Liberal balance sheet and as soon as Harper 'defaults' on one of his budget commitments call an election. I'm sure the Conservatives are already talking about removing Harper as soon as possible - he couldn't win a majority in two passes against Dion and then he ran and hid behind the prorogue. Its an understatement to say he is a wounded leader.

So, 70 days ago Harper's government presented a budget that all but ignored the current economic situation and now they're preparing for billions in deficit spending over the next 5 years. An the irony, Harper is an economist by education - how did he miss what the rest of the world knew was reality last November????? Harper deserves to be thrown out of the Leadership of the Conservative party. And, Flaherty should be thrown out too for being a 'yes' man!

Prediction: Liberal majority government by September with the Conservatives returning to post Mulroney levels in the house. Then the Conservatives will implode and re-emerge as two parties again - the 'new PC party' and the 'Neo-Cons.'

Richard McAllister
from Canada writes:
The Socialist ' opposition coalition ' is dead. Long live Canada.God keep our land ' Glorious and Free ' .But first let's banish Jacko to the Antarctic and put him on ice for a long while.

The gov is swapping one debt for another but the mortgages pay interest at a higher rate than the debt the gov is issuing to pay for it. In other words, the gov will PROFIT out of this in the same way a bank does. It pays less in interest than it receives. The spread in rates is profit. This won't show up on the gov's income statement because it's an investment and not an expense.

The gov is also not taking any additional risk because the gov - through the CMHC - has already insured the mortgages so if they default, the gov was already on the hook. All this does is increase liquidity to the banks. It won't cost the gov a dime.

Tom Thumb
from Canada writes:
D Wiatzka from Canada writes: Tom Thumb - Yes the liberals did have surpluses during the years when times were good, but that was largely thanks to the GST and NAFTA, both products of the Mulroney gov't. Consider this legacy of the Liberals. There has only been one time since world war two that a 'structural deficit' was CREATED in Canada. As document by the G&Ms article yesterday, that structural deficit was created in 1974 by the Trudeau gov't. Those structural deficits peaked with the last Trudeau/MacEachen budget for the fiscal year 1984/1985. The structural deificts continued but immediately began receding with the first Mulroney/Wilson budget, introduced in May 1985. It was finally the GST and NAFTA which hoisted our patoots out of the structural deficit mess after the recession of the early 1990s. Only thing Chretien/Martin did to add to that was download programs to the provinces while capping funding for those programs. That made things even better for the feds but worse for the provinces. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm not disputing where the debt came from. That's pretty common history. That fact remains that the most recent Liberal government was able to balance the budget through thick and thin. Quite frankly, I'm not like the other parrots on this comments board. I will vote for whatever party is able to propose a budget the balances the books at the end of the year. Simple as that. People should wake up to what a democracy is, and not simply vote along partisan lines. Vote for the party that has the best platform, not the name. Does anyone truely think that this budget represents what a truely 'fiscal conservative' would table. Did think so!

Island Man from Victoria
from Canada writes:
Harper is being put in the penalty box and he will wear every bit of this deficit each and every time this report comes out...to remind Canadians who will continue to lose their jobs of Harper's incompetence and allow Ignatieiff a chance to form a responsible government without the help of Layton...lets hope Harper falls before winter

Jack Sprat
from Calgary, Canada writes:
I'll be honest, I want Harper gone. I think he wouldn't have had to stand on his head like this if he had been a better statesman and less divisive. I also think he's short on ideas and his big moment is past. Hopefully, Harper leaves before he gets thrown out.

Will Ignatieff be a suitable replacement for Harper. We won't know until he actually releases policies that don't change from day to day. I'm hopeful, though. Not because I want to vote Liberal but because I love the thought of having two fiscally responsible, pragmatic, middle-of-the-road parties to keep each other honest.

Right Winger
from Canada writes:
Game, set and match goes to...Harper!Anyone that has the ability to think clearly knew that this silly coalition was toast and today Iggy confirmed it. This is great for Canada. We need two strong political parties and the coalition sure wasn't one of them.

true conservative
from Canada writes:
Brian C - no if Harper refuses the updates, then a no from the LPC brings the govt to an election. One where the first thing done is the CPC refusing to be accountable.

The Money Ain't For Nothing
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: The Money Ain't For Nothing, British Columbia, I read, has been affected by the change as well.

And the reason I don't disagree with the change is that its unfair that provinces would get equalization that would allow it to provide better services per capita than those provinces (Ontario) that provide the equalization.

Jack, that makes no sense. The issue here is 'transfer payments' for servcies that are received by all provinces and not 'equialization paymnets' that are received by some provinces such as Ontario but 'not Newfoundland'.

D G
from Canada writes:
Actually Right Winger, with Harper on a short leash, the huge deficits hanging around his and the Cons necks, and Iggy deftly getting the libs out of a publicly unpopular coalition, I would give Game, Set and Match on this one to Iggy.

GM Victoria, Peoples Republic of BC
from Canada writes:
A Conservative - Liberal coalition is far preferable to a separatist supported coalition. The Grand Coalitions in post war Germany did a good job, why don't we have a Grand Con-Lib coalition....or is this country just too partisan?

Sure I wanted to stand by my dearly held principles, but I HAD TO do what the (critically weakened) opposition party demanded because staying Prime Minister was more important to me than anything, even more important than carrying out our policies.

Neocon Destroyer
from Canada writes:
Surely no one will be surprised. Of course the two parties of big business will stick together when push comes to shove and as always, working people will pay the price. The only way off this ridiculous treadmill for working Canadians is to give far more seats to the NDP. The NDP is the party that will best represent the interests of working people. Unfortunately, too many around here, just don't get it. They'll continue to support the myth that the neo-cons and the neo-liberal model is in their best interests. The media is there to reinforce this myth and the right wing that hang out here will continue to spread these lies.

A Canadian
from Cole Harbour, Canada writes:
Harold K. from Windsor, ON, Canada writes: If I was a Con supporter, I would not be gloating about this development.

*PM Harper and his team turned their back on their principles 180 degrees, to maintain power. They adopted an essentially moderate Liberal budget.

--

Thats the problem with libbies, if PM Harper had came up with a budget that was more conservative, all the libbies would be crying that PM Harper does not listen to the wishes of Canadians and that only the LPC is capable of representing the majority of canadians.

Now that he did listen to the wishes of Canadians, he is being accused of coming up with a liberal budget.

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
Harold K. from Windsor, ON, Canada writes: If I was a Con supporter, I would not be gloating about this development.

*PM Harper and his team turned their back on their principles 180 degrees, to maintain power. They adopted an essentially moderate Liberal budget.-------------------------------------------------------Yes harold and as a conservative supporter I also understand that Canadians voted in a minority government where everyone has to give and take a little to make it work. If you are trying to drum up anger with conservative supporters over the budget good luck.

Garibaldi III from TO
from Canada writes:
Jeannie Mongrain from Ottawa, Canada writes: 'Probation??' What is this - grade three!! ------Beginners Chess ..... the loser will be next taught Horseshoe throwing to be followed by Handgranades.:-)

Bill Hopkins
from London, Canada writes:
T. M. from Edmonton, Canada writes:..... for all Canadians, under Iggie's leadership, the Liberal party has taken a big step to the right. The party should at least change their name to the Newest Little Kinda Conservative Party. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Well, if he really wants to govern, that's what he has to do. For all the extreme politics expressed on these fora, I still believe that the majority of Canadians want a more centrist, perhaps just slightly left of centre, government. Should I become convinced that's where he's heading, he'll get my vote.

Harold K.
from Windsor, ON, Canada writes:
Tor Hill Sask. from Canada writes: Mr. Layton had his chance to do the right thing in 2005-6. That is the time he could have decided to throw his lot in with the Liberals instead of the current minority government. Now whoever might have thought that a left-of-centre party like the NDP might hold some power over a far right-wing group like the Harper-led minority government? Mr. Layton was outfoxed by Mr. Harper in thinking that he might usurp the Liberals. Hey, both the CPC and the NDP want to usurp the Liberals! What a scenario. Anyway, I say, Mr. Ignatieff did the best thing under the circumstances. We've already had a good taste of accountability, CPC-style; let's have just a few more tastes of it. >>>>>> Tor Hill, well said. That is a big reason why so many centerists/pragmatist are irritated by Layton's constant righteous indignation. We have seen it before, so this is more about his gaining a piece of power. I am not an NDP basher, like many here, as I see that they serve an important role in our parliament -- to put it simply, to keep the Liberals (and to lesser extent, CPC) honest and from getting too pragmatic. Also, they are an important social conscience of sorts.... Unfortunately, things did not work out this time, and Mr.Layton is looking more and more angry -- it may be time for new leadership there. Cheers.

Peter Guindon
from Hellifax, Canada writes:
Some 'recessionary' budget. Sounds like a lot of three month construction jobs and funding for already recession-proof jobs in health care and scientific research. For the vulgar majority, there still remains no sign of federally enforced increases to minimum wage. The country needs to take care of the kind of wage abuse taking place in the Atlantic provinces. The provincial staff of Nova Scotia just seems to assume those of us earning nine bucks or less an hour are a pile of whiney fat cats. Why bother voting Conservative, Liberal or NDP when skinflint provinces like mine hold us back from any hope of economic progress?Chintzy wages are the sole reason why Atlantic Canadians do their grocery shopping at the dollar store.

Well, of course one might expect a leftist organization try to put a misleading spin on things.

But look at it this way:

Yes, the government is borrowing billions to swap for the mortgage assets. However, the expected return on the mortgage assets exceeds the cost of government-issued bonds that offset the mortgages (and hence could actually help the government's fiscal position).

As mortgages mature, the debt instruments that offset them will be paid off. Zero cost.

If there is a significantly increased default rate on the mortgages, then it will cost the taxpayer. But again, that would have happened anyway! These mortgages were all guaranteed by the government before the transactions.

I stand by my statement, there is no deficit impact to these transactions and no increased taxpayer risk.

Garibaldi III from TO
from Canada writes:
Iain Scott from Canada writes: As predicted, expected, and appropriate. And Jack and Gilles went up the hill..-----You must have not heard.... they didn't follow that script after all... they chose 'The new Italian Job' instead.:-)

Alberta Dennis Notso,redneck
from Canada writes:
The Ontario provincial NDP are fighting against legislating York teachers back to work. 45000 or more students out for 3 months. Maybe Layton could go and support the Ont. NDP. That is about his level of thinking.

'That fact remains that the most recent Liberal government was able to balance the budget through thick and thin.'

The libs were lucky they had all thick and no thin. Harper was following Martin's (Martin being a good finance minister but lousy PM and lousy person) lead up until the Yanks and Europeans (more the former than the later but the later certainly contributed) blew up the world's economy. You can blame Canada's deficit entirely on Lehman Bros, Freddie, Fannie, Royal Bank of Scotland, et al.

No gov, not CPC, not Lib and sure as s**t not the dippers could have stopped the economy from being smashed but the non-partisan Canadian Bank Act saved us from far, far worse.

Kerry H
from ORDINARY, Canada writes:
true conservative from Canada writes: Greg Out West - actually, I'm impressed that Harper didn't cave into Quebec again and super enriched equalization. Or is it super-duper enriched at this point?

No your right True,, He only lied once more about 'ordinary Canadians not caring about the arts' and gave 160 million to the arts.. Oh and where did they realease this tidbit of news.. Quebec City.. How many votes will 160 mil by in Quebec??

Gerry Pankhurst
from Bridgetown Barbados (Temp), Canada writes:
Can that faint background noise be the Rae railroad engine warming up for another chance at the leadership? Iggy has shot himself in the foot where support from his erstwhile coalition parners to back his Budget amendment has gone down the drain. First major task and he failed, in spades.Is it bye bye Iggy, so soon?

Stan L
from Canada writes:
It's funny that Harper has to 'walk the walk' with igantieff's forced accountibility amendment......Harper has talked the talked but certainly hasn't delivered.

One thing I have been musing is I wonder if Harper is sorry now that he hasn't follwed through on the promise to impliment Gomery's suggestions? The largest spending will come from Public Works (which as we all know if the home of the sponsorship scandal) the problems that allowed Adscam to happen, still haven't been addressed leaving the door wide open for something to fall through the cracks either inadvertently or by design. The auditor and the parlimentary budget officer are going to pick up on this AND fast given the quarterly updates.......just a thought.

Slightly Optimistic
from the West Coast, Canada writes:
Jack Layton is the most confused, out of touch, politician we have had in this country for many years. The fact that NDPers chose him as their leader and have kept him around this long speaks volumes about that party's complete incompetence. It's time to stop giving tax payers' money to such an irrelevant party.

D Wiatzka
from Canada writes:
Tom Thumb - The Liberals balanced the budget 'through thick and thin'? More like 'through thick and thick' given that the times were all good from the shortly after time they took over.

I agree with your take on 'voting for who can manage things' and presently I'm still convinced that the CPC is the lesser of the two evils available for governing.

I submit to you that this budget may not incur deficits as big as announced, given that it took economic forecasts which were on the worse side of the spectrum and also because the gov't is no guaranteed to spend all of the money.

I'm hoping that this budget will disarm the opposition and allow the CPC to get back to the business of running the country.

Plus there is nothing in this budget I can see which has the possibility of creating a structural deficit. Therefore it follows that if the global economy recovers the feds will see there budgets return to the black.

Brian W. from Ontario
from Canada writes:
Robin M -- good post at 12:43. I think that Harper will accept the amendment. He would appear wreckless to dismiss the amendment (and risk an election) simply on the basis that he didn't want to be accountable for the implementation of his own budget measures. But we'll see, he does like confrontation and he could attempt to put Ignatieff in his place by refusing to accept it, challenging the Libs to defeat them. Ignatieff would then be in the undesirable situation of either triggering an election, or backing down because 'Canadians don't want an election' (memories of Dion). Al Gorman- also good comments, but as per above, I think that Ignatieff could have been blindsided if he demanded any substantive changes...Cons could have jumped on it. I don't think the Liberals have any appetite for an election at this time against this platform. But next Budget...if these measures haven't been implemented properly and the economy is faltering... Layton seems to be oblivious, doesn't he?

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
true conservative from Canada writes: Greg Out West - actually, I'm impressed that Harper didn't cave into Quebec again and super enriched equalization. Or is it super-duper enriched at this point? -------------------------------------------------------------------------Couldn't agree more. It's time for the PM of this country to start treatly all Canadians as equals. At some point you just have to say STOP. NO MORE.

Charles Brown
from Vancouver, BC, Canada writes:
Imagine how much money Canada could save each year if we downsized Parliament by kicking the NDP and Bloc out? Moreover, these two parties have never worked for the benefit of Canadians. They only worked for the benefit of their party leaders.

The Money Ain't For Nothing
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Jack Sprat from Calgary, Canada writes: The Money Ain't For Nothing, fair enough. I'm obviously not educated enough about the issue to have my opinion taken seriously.

Still, why should Newfoundland and British Columbia get higher per capita transfers than other provinces?

Perhaps because in the case of NL you have a smaller population spread over a large geographical area and the cost to deliver on a per population basis is much higher?

The deficit is the conservatives fault! Pure and simple.***********************************************************************

Tom Thumb…your assessment is pure sophistry. The Conservatives balanced the budget. The Liberals forced the deficit. Those are the facts. Without the Liberals jumping into bed with and allowing the separatists to run this country, and thereby blackmailing the country into these deficits, there would be no massive deficits. Your leader said so. And believe me there are a lot of experts that do not believe in massive deficits as being the cure-all. >>>>>>>>>>By the way Thumb&8230;do not forget the Conservatives paid down the debt by 37 billion so the real number is not 85 or 64. It is more like half of that at most and when Danny Williams turns down his share for NL, then the deficit will be even smaller. You are a consummate spinner Thumb&8230;you must work in the media to be able to come up with that kind of a whopper.

Charles Brown
from Vancouver, BC, Canada writes:
Alberta Dennis Notso,redneck from Canada writes: The Ontario provincial NDP are fighting against legislating York teachers back to work. 45000 or more students out for 3 months. Maybe Layton could go and support the Ont. NDP. That is about his level of thinking.

* Posted 28/01/09 at 1:18 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

=============================

The provincial government should just let the picket lines freeze in the cold.

Stanman 4
from Canada writes:
Infrastructure projects are meant to pump money quickly into the economy. All indications are that capital projects will not proceed until 2010. Given the condition that fiscally-constrained municipalities pony up matching funds, the true cost of the program will be less than the budgeted amount. Many municipalities simply do not have the financial resources to participate.

On this single issue, Mr. Ignatieff's watchdog role might ensure that these funds are made available quickly to stimulate the economy. Injecting money into the economy sooner rather than later with fewer strings attached would benefit all regions of the country.

It could easily come to this: the government opens its books, shows accountability, a willingness to make funds available (with less than expected participation), and claims that it has lived up to its budgetary word. What then? Perhaps a further slide in the economy and a lost opportunity?

Harold K.
from Windsor, ON, Canada writes:
Bill L from Canada writes: '-Don't worry about manufacturing jobs, they are disappearing anyway, begin to focus tax policy (and cuts) along with more training programs to the trades and the knowledge based workers. There is a shortage of select trades now more infrastructure today without these training opportunities for more tradespeople may mean further delays.-More stimulus for the 'green' economy (including nuclear power)

>>>>> Bill L, you clearly don't live in southern Ontario or Quebec. While you may be perfectly happy to rely on other nations to make everything we need, at some point (likely long past) we need to hold on to our ability to make things: especially products high in technology and R&D - like vehicles, mass transit, etc.

Also, at some point this becomes a 'national security' issue. Do you really want to be without transportation, and have lost abilty/knowledge to your own, if a conflict errupted with China or India? (where the next wave of cheap cars will be built)

Apparently Zero. The 'cultural community' of the parasite province are whining a bitching they didn't get enough. Then whining that Harper didn't ALSO give them their old handouts back along with the new ones.

I have no idea why Harper has been trying to appease those which will never be content with too much of other people's money. QC's blood-sucking parasites need the boot.

The Bubble
from Canada writes:
Harper will never change, that is a fact. I wonder how afraid of Ingatief he is. Looks like our grandchildren just got a big bill from us, pretty great how the rich of this country just got the taxpayers to fund their status quo for a while longer, the cynicism of this budget is pretty high. Everyone is still going to lose a lot of jobs, this money won't help, it's big enough for Harper to hide all of his mistakes. It's nice to not be greedy, not worry about making a lot of money and paying those taxes, the middle class is fcuked.I hope all you Liberals and Conservatives can get along in the same boat, reminds me of Life of Pi.

T Boyle
from Canada writes:
We knew weeks ago (when Ignatieff was anointed chief) that the Conservative budget would pass. All of this rhetoric is nothing more more than window dressing. Here's another sure bet. Ignatieff will sit out the worse part of the recession shoring up his support and resources and at the first sign of recovery (aided and abetted by this budget) he will strike - not for the good of the country but because he will deem the time right for a Liberal win. Cynical perhaps, realistic certainly as this is simply the way politics is played.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
A Canadian from Cole Harbour, Canada writes: Thats the problem with libbies, if PM Harper had came up with a budget that was more conservative, all the libbies would be crying that PM Harper does not listen to the wishes of Canadians and that only the LPC is capable of representing the majority of canadians.================================================

Disingenuous at best.

Harper who has long campaigned on fiscal conservatism chucked it out the window for the sake of political expediency.

Don't forget that the attack line of 'Big Spender' is a traditional conservative line....well you can kiss that goodbye having perfected the practice.

If calling what Harper has done lets you sleep better, good on ya. Don't try to sell us that it's not a total sell out of core beliefs.

Harper had every opportunity to craft a conservative budget heavily skewed towards tax cuts and reduced spending yet he went about as far left as the NDP on this. Why? Did he think Canadians wouldn't buy his plan?

Harper will stay in office for now. But at what price? That great differentiator, the trumpeted and totally illusory fiscal prudence is now gone out the window. You can't use that line ever again with a straight face.

Today is a victory for Harper. In a few months though, he'll discover it was a phyrric one.

Stan L
from Canada writes:
Bill Thompson from Calgary, Canada writes: '…your assessment is pure sophistry. The Conservatives balanced the budget. The Liberals forced the deficit. Those are the facts.'

==============================

Sorry NOT the facts...i don't go by the Harper or Iganteiff for that, I look towards the parlimentary budget officer who has confirmed that the deficit was in place in November when Flaherty announced his update.....becuase Flaherty chose to misrepresent this information doens't all of of a sudden make it any more true simply becuase you said the word fact.

Wayne Morrison
from Toronto, Canada writes:
The NDPs role as the conscience of parliament is long gone [having succumbed to reality in the 1980s], which leaves the NDP with a policy buried in the mid twentieth century, and no real need to exist except to provide employment for a few MPs, and to provide a beacon for those who give no thought to whom they support, but like to feel self-rightous every once in awhile.

D Wiatzka
from Canada writes:
Brian W et al - Do you think the amendment can be written in such a way as to force the 'updates' to be some sort of confidence vote?

I ask because I don't really see the updates as being something the CPC will be worried about.

Without it being a confidence matter, updates will be given, the opposition will complain things aren't happening fast enough, the gov't will point out that there are processes to be followed and they have to wait for other participants (provinces, municipalities, etc)

Peter M
from Canada writes:
Brilliant? Hardly. Mr. Ignatieff has played this like a party leader with low risk tolerance, a massive debt and no fund-raising machine. The only certainty at the moment is that the political landscape is heavily mined, and nobody is going to be able to relax while navigating the next few months. The Liberals have just given the OK to a budget that they may well end up wearing along with the Conservatives. The economic projections on which it is based are implausible (see the International Monetary Fund projections for comparison) and the EI and pay equity elements have to potential to play very poorly with the Liberal base if the economy does not stabilize soon. The NDP and Bloc are now free to go after the government on their issues. Mr. Ignatieff, on the other hand, has just tied his own hands. He has also put his leadrship in play as an issue. We'll see soon enough if he's up to it. At the end of the day we have a budget crafted by a government that had no options if it wanted to survive, supported by an opposition that lacked the cash and the cojones to bring them down. Anybody who expects anything good to come from that recipe is kidding themselves. And you have to know that the nasty-boy in Mr. Harper's head is urging him to call the Liberal's bluff on the amendment.

T k
from Kingston, Canada writes:
I am not big on how the Globe has labelled this story. If Ignatieff had rejected the budget there would have been incessant whining on here on what a house divided the country is and how no one wants another election. The reality is that no matter what Ignatieff would have down there would have been complaining. My take is that because he has not rejected the budget in no way indicates he is willing to place nice with the current conservative regime. My understanding is that the Conservatives have tried here and Ignatieff, newly minted as he is is watching and waiting. I do not think he was ever a fan of the coalition. That is ok. Many Liberals were not either. Perhaps, cumbersome and painful as it might be the Cons and the Liberals might begin to have a bit of an inkling that they can work together...at least enough to ensure some progress in the tough times ahead. People are turning on Ignatieff just as they did Dion...politics a dirty game.

John Stockwell
from Toronto, Canada writes:
This is the appropriate action based on the current economic situation in Canada. While I'm no fan of Harper's and believe he is absolutely the wrong choice to Lead our country, Ignatieff did the right thing. So, please shut the hell up Jack Layton and get busy trying to fix the broken economy - without which, none of your social programs stand a chance of surviving.

'The Conservatives balanced the budget. The Liberals forced the deficit. Those are the facts.'

Now, now. Lets not get crazy. The budget would have been balanced only if the economy hadn't tanked in Q4 of 08. Given the facts, deficit there would have been. The lib/bloc/dipper coalition forced that deficit into the stratosphere but avoiding a deficit would have been impossible.

And for you leftards who will immediately squawk about gst/tax cuts (and you know you will!) you all know full well that there was extreme pressure to spend the previous surpluses already and without the tax cuts, the money would have been added to the increased spending side for sure (and by whatever gov was in charge) and the deficit would be as big or bigger than it is. So don't insult my intelligence or yours by suggesting otherwise.

Garibaldi III from TO
from Canada writes:
Sasha Nagy from Toronto, Canada writes: A friendly message from your Globe and Mail web moderators: If readers persist in making crude or insulting comments, this thread will be closed. we'll give a few more minutes, and if it doesn't settle down, then it will be closed.----Could You provide an example please

D Wiatzka
from Canada writes:
Stan L - The surpluses were becoming absurd. The tax cuts were a continuation of the trend which had been established by the Liberals.

If the Liberals had retained power, they too would have continued cutting taxes to keep the surpluses from growing too large. When this recession hit it certainly would have resulted in deficit budgets for a Liberal gov't as well.

It's complete hysteria to think that the budgets would have been balanced by the Liberals when there's a global meltdown going on.

Gerry Pankhurst
from Bridgetown Barbados (Temp), Canada writes:
Oh what a glorious day to be a loyal Canadian as well as a proud, card carrying, member of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Mr Harper may not have the seats but he has just regained the position of de facto majority leader and, at the same time, achieved a major step toward Canada having a two party political system. Bye bye Socialists and Separatists

Philosopher King
from Ivory Tower, Canada writes:
I call this the BINGE AND PURGE budget.

The Conservatives ran around for a month getting input so leftwing they eventually threw it up on the floor of parliament.

There you go folks, a budget.

No vision, no leadership.

The only things I wanted to see were a much more improved EI system, increased GST rebates for the poor and SOME dollars for 21st century improvements to 20th century infrastructure. These things help people survive until the economy can recover.

Instead we have a meaningless hodge podge of dipper crap.

I really thought that for once we'd have the right type of spending but well contained by fiscal conservative ideology.

GlynnMhor of Skywall
from Canada writes:
All those who last month decried Harper as a bungler, and claimed prorogation was a great mistake, etc, etc, must be savouring the taste of pie filled with umbles.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
Gerry Pankhurst from Bridgetown Barbados (Temp), Canada writes: Oh what a glorious day to be a loyal Canadian as well as a proud, card carrying, member of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Mr Harper may not have the seats but he has just regained the position of de facto majority leader and, at the same time, achieved a major step toward Canada having a two party political system. Bye bye Socialists and Separatists================================================

Alfie Didn't Choke.... Like Really...
from Canada writes:
Mr. Ignatieff made the best possible decision. Cripes he didn't even want to be the Lib leader at this time, pressed into action, so what else could he do? Defeat the government, form a coalition, all while unelected by his own party? He'd look more opportunistic than Jack. Passions certainly heighted on this thread. Respect to all.

G L
from Thunder Bay ON., Canada writes:
What a surprise! The Coalition is dead. Mr Ignatieff arrogantly proclaims we will hold them accountable and put them on probation. Really Mr Ignatieff? Two fluff amendments which I suspect the government will agree to.I know Mr Ignatieff has been out of the country for decades but sir in a democracy, if any one is going to hold the government of Canada accountable it's the people of Canada. and not you, or your party. Might we suggest that, as many Canadians,a majority I would suggest don't know you. all that well and are unware of your political leanings while in the US. If any one is going to be on probation it's One Micheal Ignatieff,Not only by the Canadian public but the left-wing of your party.which according to reports is not happy. that you sunk the coalition.

Len E
from St. John's, Canada writes:
Here we go again... some with the Liberal Criminals baloney, and some with the CONservative nonsence. Take a break folks! Both sides of that battle have more than a few skeletons in the closet! I'd like to se the works face a reasonable justice system, but thanks to them both, we don't have one! We all know that the Liberals would drop this budget in less than half a heartbeat if they had a penny in the next election acount! They won't use the coalition option because some many people don't understand or like it, and it would hurt them in the next general election. The NDP will cry foul because they are seeing their first real chance at power evaporate. Simple. On the other side, Harper wouldn't hesitate to go back to the polls if he thought it would give him what he wants. The fact is, he would first look very bad for costing Canadians another 3 or 4 hundred million dollars, and second, he would have a real fight on his hands with Ignatief, and he knows he would probably loose. The rst of this is just posturing B.S.!

Bill Thompson
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Stan L: Well believing a bean counter called the parliamentary budget officer says it all for me. You probably also believe what you read in the papers. You forget that governments have ways and means to offset the ebb and flow of monies coming into and out of government. The budgetary officer is just recording what he thinks is happening and not what is happening. Clearly you are of the mindset Stan that numbers are fixed and all is black and white in accounting. The truth my friend is that that is not so. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The government has many ways to present data in many forms and can take into account many factors, or dismiss others to best reflect the state of the economy and government. The budgetary officer is a lowly bean counter with no access to the levers of power, fiscal or monetary policy and would not know a deficit if it bit him in the butt. So to say the deficit is the fault of any conservative is very misleading. In fact we have a choice not to spend this money in which case the budget is balanced. And there are some excellent arguments for not spending this Keynesian madness. So Stan, Like Thumb…you are full of it.

Brian C
from Canada writes:
Figures that the G&M editors would delete my comment as usual

To true conservative who writes: 'Brian C - no if Harper refuses the updates, then a no from the LPC brings the govt to an election. One where the first thing done is the CPC refusing to be accountable. '

It's quite clear that the LPT doesn't want an election. They looked at the polls last night, and decided not to offer a single change to a single dime in the budget even though they don't like it. They see that Canadians like what they see and don't want to be offside with Canadians.

Voting down a popular budget is like going to a casino where you still owe lots of money from previous betting losses and placing a bet on Double 0. Even Iggy knows how to count.

Allan Beveridge
from Edmonton, Canada writes:
Logic is full of Epic Win from Canada, thank you for the info and letting a little air into the discussion about 'Alberta being screwed by Ottawa'. I am not saying it does not happen however often people put their own interpretation of why something was done without the all the facts. Frequently this is due to the fact people tend to listen to ideas that support their beliefs and automatically do the opposite to those that do no. That is what is so good having so many participate, if we make a statement we believe to be true but is false we can actually learn about things we were unaware of (if one doesn't mind admitting they are imperfect....and do not know everything)

JP Warwick from Canada, yes, I am slightly above the limit so I did notice that I am not getting any tax relief. So what, isn't like I am going to start suffering. I have no issues with it per say, though I do wish they would put the tens of thousands I fork over to better use than they do now.

Crusty Curmudgeon
from Ottawa, Canada writes:
I have waited a long time to see intelligence on capital hill.

Iggy has finally shown some.

The budget is for the most part popular -- except for the bleeting of the sheep on this forum.

The coalition was the brainf__t of the NDP -- and would have undercut the LIEberals claims to leadership.

If Iggy had brought down the government he would have lost the election.

This guarantees that the Dippers will be cut down to nothing, the Bloc -- as far as I am concerned should be jailed for treason (and are only a regional non-entity anyway) and the Liberals look like they actual care about the country.

The only thing keeping the Libs from power was the fact that they had no real leader.

Harold Uhlman
from Lunenburg, NS, writes:
Bill Thompson from Calgary - Bill it is a bit of a hard sell to blame the deficit on the opposition. First, the present government had gone into deficit position before they acknowledged the recession. Probably as much as $13B. All of the deficit therefore is not part of a stimulus package. It is a shortfall for government spending. How did that happen? The largest spending government in 'Canadian history' and ill advised GST cuts that do nothing to stimulate spending. Secondly, if deficit is wrong and contrary to Conservative fiscal thinking, then how come Mr. Harper didn't cling to that principle and go down fighting on a principle, not run to the GG to hide behind her skirt? He surely didn't fear Mr. Dion in an election, did he? The deficit is his - he has the financial pen - he writes what he wants - he could have done better.

Truitt Bradshaw
from Canada writes:
Wow, the dribble of the first hundred or so comments on this thread make it impossible to read through the rest. Apparently Canadians have nothing constructive to say yet still won't shut up. This thread should be moderated.

Dan xxxxxx
from Canada writes:
JP Warwick from Canada: I guess we see what we want to see when watching the press conference, eh? Me, I saw a man relaxed in front of the press able to chuckle , but ultimately stick to the primciples. He didn't back away from a question, and told it like he thought he should tell it. Like he said, it's not his job to run the government , it's his job to provide checks and balances to the government.

Eric Baggs
from St. John's, Canada writes:
Well it's back to the same old game n'est pas. The liberals support the PC's . I don't use capitals for these parties as they have lost the right to be a political party. Talk about games!!! I used to be a staunch PC and was forced to change my vote because of Harper and his conniving ways and any reason to become a liberal has now vanished. Canada, women in particular, has now been thoroughly screwed over. I can't take advantage of any breaks because I would have to borrow money and I am in the wrong social and tax status (single WASP male) so there is nothing in this budget for people like myself. Maybe I should apply for a bailout. Disgusted is the politest word I can think of that you are allowed to print. Well Canada, you put them in...congrats are due for increasing your personal debt along with that of the country

I am well past the point of anger. I have harnessed my anger into unlearning fallacy after fallacy I have been indoctrinated into my entire life without even knowing it. We cannot solve this problem with the current narrow spectrum of debate and the landscape of current political ideology. I am deeply concerned about this, and I will continue to post to do my utmost to provide clarity over partisan politics - I owe this to my family and future descendants and will do my best to divert them from being swallowed by the hideous jaws of the State.

For as long as we ignore the cancer at the core of our economy - our monetary system - we will continue to bicker over questions of no importance, matters of no substance, and continue to coerce each other - each embedded with their long history of misconceptions - through the voting system, each thinking they know what's best for the other - and try to ram it down the throat of another at the ballot box.

I am not looking down on anyone, nor do I think I have all the answers. I went numb when I learned to see, and once you have your eyes opened, you cannot go back. I implore you to do the same.

Other than that, I had a fantastic lunch with my kids today on this beautiful snow day. I was one of the lucky ones who could stay home today. They painted me a picture, and we made a clay solar system today. Isn't that grand?

Philosopher King
from Ivory Tower, Canada writes:
JP Warwick from Canada writes: '... And for you leftards... you all know full well that there was extreme pressure to spend the previous surpluses... the money would have been added to the increased spending side for sure... and the deficit would be as big or bigger than it is...'

Um okay, so explain to me again the part where reducing tax revenues results in having more money ie less debt at the end of the day?

Beavis Swackhammer
from Talking Softly but ..., writes:
Garibaldi III from TO from Canada writes: Sasha Nagy from Toronto, Canada writes: A friendly message from your Globe and Mail web moderators: If readers persist in making crude or insulting comments, this thread will be closed. we'll give a few more minutes, and if it doesn't settle down, then it will be closed.----Could You provide an example please

====================

I think she is refering to the spate of comment relating to deglutition -- for which they have the cleverness of the headline editor to thank.

Joseph Whistle
from Canada writes:
Fact is, that if we had an election now, we'd have either again a minority Conservative government, but with less strength, or else a minority Liberal government.The Cons get some more time, under close watch, without being able to run amok, and then, next elections, we either get a minority or majority Liberal government. The Conservatives will lose more clout every time they make a fool of themselves.

Canadian in France
from a snowdrift somewhere, Canada writes:
GST should go back to 7% next February 2010. More of an incentive to buy now as opposed to waiting. Also four extra years of an extra 2% GST will claw back that deficit by about $40-50 billion.

Wayne Young
from Victoria BC, Canada writes:
As a 100% Conservative and fully paid up member of the CPC I am very happy with the outcome so far this year. Despite all those rumours regarding the early demise of my boy Stevie - well what can you say folks he is still sitting in the PM's seat and has new partner for the spring dance. Iggy is an interesting guy and I would certainly choose him for date over Dion any day we shall see though keeping an eye on him as he has more upstairs than Stephanie. I kind feel sorry for Jack though what with being stood up and all. The only remaining issue though is the gleam in Mulcair's eyes as he sharpens his political ginzo knife set for the leadership convention. Let's face it folks the NDP overplayed their hand and forgot to cover their keyster so it's out of the pool.

Wassup Widat
from Canada writes:
Now serving number 44 --- 44 times in a row the libs have supported the con's bills, either by staying away, or by voting with the govt.

They complain and kick all the while saying the cons are incompetent, the plan is bad, the policy is worse -- and still they support the con's.

Even with their recent promises to defeat the govt no matter what the budget says - they still support the con's.

No party finances to speak of , no policy of their own as they consistently support the con policy , no proven leader , worst drubbing ever last election , hijacked by the dips , led to the river by sleazy jack ---- what a year its been for the LPC.

Sam Heaton
from Ottawa, Canada writes:
Coalition or not, Ignatieff has been agreeing with Harper's positions publicly since he assumed the position of Liberal leader.

Besides his for-against-for-against back-and-forth about tax cuts during the last few weeks (he's obviously once again 'for') Ignatieff's right-wing neo-liberal economic ideas are the same as Stephen Harper's right-wing neo-liberal economic ideas.

Neither have an imagination beyond what they learned in Economics 101. Canadians can see far enough ahead to know that extra pocket change will do them as little good as extra corporate profit. I never thought I would say this, but Jack Layton is the only one thinking further ahead than the tip of his nose at this point.

NL Patriot
from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes:
Jason Roy from Central Nova - After October 14th AKA STILL Peter Mackay Country, Canada writes: Garibaldi III from TO from Canada writes: NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Dan Shortt from Toronto, Canada writes: I have a feeling that when the next federal election occurs that Mr Williams is going to take his ABC campaign all across this country and I for one can't wait.----Danny could start a 'none of the above' party ..... and probably win.:-)

----------------------------------------

Danny was just on tv lamenting Iggy`s position...

Looks like he`ll have to change that campaign to ABCL..

-------

Jason I was thinking the same thing yesterday. Willaims was enraged when our NL conservative MP's voted for the budget that gutted the Atlantic Accord. He wanted them to vote against it.

I am curious to see if he is going to appeal to our Liberal MP's now to break with their leader and vote against this budget? And what will they do.

Most of those MP's would never have gotten elected unless Willaims had helped them and I am curious to see if they vote for the people of NL or tow the party line.

Stan L
from Canada writes:
Bill Thompson from Calgary, Canada writes: Stan L: Well believing a bean counter called the parliamentary budget officer says it all for me. You probably also believe what you read in the papers. You forget that governments have ways and means to offset the ebb and flow of monies .......

==========================================Well Bill, your rant would be fine if you perhaps educated yourself on the role of the parliamentary budget officer. This is a post and a position created and appointed by Harper (I applauded this very much when it came out) the role is to ensure that the numbers used by government aren’t manipulated to paint a rosier or more dire position to the other members of government but most importantly to us. His numbers are meant to be &8216;black and white&8217; and without spin&8230;..Harper instituted this role because he thought that governments past had been able to misrepresent issues too much and he wanted a &8216;buck stops here&8217; type person to review numbers put out by the party in power. BY DESIGN and by law the parliamentary budget officer has access to ALL information associated with the numbers the government releases (so no, not a low level bean counter as you assert)

Armchair Politician
from Kelowna, Canada writes:
Poor Jack...it's so hard to climb down from that only 'far-fetched' potential to acquire a ministerial position...he's only concerned that Canadians do not trust Harper! Right! As for Iggy, the reporting has some merit, for Canadians that is; Iggy probably won't know what to do with it when he gets the report. At least it will give him a little time to think up some new threats...deja vu all over again?

J Sparrow
from Canada writes:
You know, as I read through these comments, there are opinions/posts that I agree with, some that I don't agree with, however, that's the nature of politics and that's what makes it interesting. But every so often one comes across a comment so outrageous, so over the top, that it actually makes you spontaneously burst out in laughter - and this little jewel has done just that -

Dude, where's my Canada? from Canada writes: The NDP are the only party left with credibility. ...

That absolutely cracked me up!!!! That is, and has got to be, the funniest posting yet this year!!!! I mean, how can you top that?? Thank you Dude, you are a true comic relief!!!!

p lailey
from vancouver, Canada writes:
GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes:' All those who last month decried Harper as a bungler, and claimed prorogation was a great mistake, etc, etc, must be savouring the taste of pie filled with umbles. '

LOL! You won't see many Liberals eating humble pie. Apparently the thought of PM Dion and his second in command Jack Layton has already passed from their memory. I call it selective memory.

Charles Giffin
from Canada writes:
I 'm glad the Libs are supporting the budget. I despise the NDP for their immaturity, lack of any real suggestions and obvious lack of leadership. The fact they announced they weren't going to vote for the budget before it was even read indicates their own willingness to PLAY POLITICS instead participate in this very real reality. SHAME on you LAYTON. Hats off to the LIBERALS, No Mr. Harper please quit your pathetic politics and do the job you were elected to do GRRR!.

Nick Wright
from Halifax, Canada writes:
Jack Layton simply has no clue as to strategy. Rigid ideology of the left is no better than rigid ideology of the right--both lead to warfare and confrontational politics, regardless of the merits of the proposals on the table. The rigid snap; the flexible survive.

Philosopher King
from Ivory Tower, Canada writes:
I can't honestly understand anyone who didn't realize that Ignatieff would support this budget, even though it is admittedly more leftwing than any Liberal budget I've seen.

Hugh 78
from Canada writes:
Neocon Destroyer from Canada writes: The only way off this ridiculous treadmill for working Canadians is to give far more seats to the NDP. The NDP is the party that will best represent the interests of working people. Unfortunately, too many around here, just don't get it.

________________________________________________________________

Ummm....no thanks. I refuse to vote NDP for their consistent mandate of spending now and having future generations shoulder the cost now. Yes, lets be socially responsible, but lets also be socially responsible within our means.

You have set the dates Mr. Ignatieff, now please articulate the trigger

Spending, fraught with dangers of boondoggle and waste merely to MarkTime for a US recovery that may take decades, if ever, to recover is not the solution. Canada must have the fortitude and visionary leadership to strike out on its own to create wealth. Canada has limited ammunition ... don't let them go to waste and end up without options ... remember the Alamo.

Mike from Van
from Canada writes:
They're all a bunch of liars and opportunists. So what if we have a 1% contraction? We NEED to produce and consume less anyway. I don't believe for a second that we need to go $40B into debt over this tempest in a teapot.

Sam Heaton
from Ottawa, Canada writes:
No one has explained yet how exploiting the economic crisis as a way to advance ideologically-based policies to increase corporate profit and other neo-liberal conservative positions is going to actually benefit the country at all. Any takers???

Bill Thompson
from Calgary, Canada writes:
To Stan L. He is a bean counter and a lowly one at that. And totally out to lunch with no credibility what so ever. As far as I am concerned he has as much credibility as the IMF…None.

Rob Duncanson
from Toronto, Canada writes:
The NDP and Bloc do not care about what is reasonable or right, or what is good for Canada. They just care about trying to get power. And if the situation were reversed, the Conservatives and Liberals would be playing the same games. That is what is wrong with politics and politicians!

Right Winger
from Canada writes:
J SparrowHow true. I almost shot my coffee through my nose when I read that one.But I have to admit, 'dinner table' Jack knows how to talk a good game, shame there's very little substance to anything he says. But, some people are gullible enough to fall for his BS. The same 18% as always.

Frangesco Bernard
from Windsor, Canada writes:
Although I would have liked to see this budget defeatead to get Mr. Harper out of there, I`m not completely sorry to see it end the way it did. Jack Layton got his repayment for voting against Mr. Paul Martin who got Canada out of the deficit a nd started paying down the national debt. So , what goes around comes around. We know that Paul Martin had good ideas, its too bad he resigned. If he was still there, Canada wouldn`t have seen any of this mess.

bob saunders
from Belleville, ON, Canada writes:
NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: This decision should be a signal to the NDP that Jack Layton has to go. It is time that they got them selves an adult leader and someone who can be taken seriously.

He is so desparate to get the NDP into power that he would do anything regardless of how it impacts the rest of the country.

I don't lile this budget. I don't like all this big spending because I don't think it is going to work.

I don't like the changes that Harper slipped in to the Equalization formula that is going to cost NL an extra 1.5B over three years, the equilivant of removing 22 Billion from Ontario's economy in 1 year.---------------- THEMS the hazards of being a have province. Funny BC, Alberta, and Saskatchewan premiers are happy and BC and Alberta get no equalization and Saskatchewan only get a little this year and none after that. NFLD has so much money according to Danny that they will help Ontario out, the next day he is complaining. Only thing consistent about the man is complaining.

p lailey
from vancouver, Canada writes:
In all of the excitement surrounding the demise of the coalition we should give kudos where they are due. So congratulations to the GG for showing the courage to agree to proroguing Parliament. And kudos to all of the people who attended rallies across Canada denouncing the coalition. Thankfully we were saved from ever seeing PM Dion and his second in command, Layton, in charge of this country. Now we can move forward. Ignatieff will have to earn the support of the Canadian people by convincing them to vote for him in an election if he ever wants to be PM. This is as it should be.

Stan L
from Canada writes:
Bill Thompson from Calgary, Canada writes: To Stan L. He is a bean counter and a lowly one at that. And totally out to lunch with no credibility what so ever. As far as I am concerned he has as much credibility as the IMF…None.

Bill, I figured you just didn't know what his role was....but now I am convinced you are more concerned with simply being contrary......If not then it take it then that you must be very very angry with Harper for creating the role, this department and paying this guy and his staff big old government taxpayer funded bucks then right?

G L
from Thunder Bay ON., Canada writes:
I agree that Mr Layton is got a lot explaining to do not only to his caucus but the grass roots of his party. He gambled ,that his romance with the Separatists hugging and saying sweet nothings in the ear of Mr Duceppe as far back as, just after the Oct Election,would result in the NDP having cabinet members in a Coalition government including the separatists and Liberals would be as sure thing. His impassioned speech to his caucus that Having separatists in Quebec was good for Canada has exploded in his face litterly.There were sceptics in his own caucus one member in particulare from Timmins Kapaskasing asked Mr Layton Have definitely got the Liberals on side.I have my doubts. HE DIDN'T and he and Mr Broadbent and Mr Chretien are left exposed for what they are and where POLITICAL OPPORTUNIST willing to sell their political souls to the devil in order to grab power by the backdoor something they failed to do via the front door. SOMEONE IN NDP should now be organizing a draft GARY DOER Premier of Manitoba to run for the federalist NDP Leadership.ASAP in order to save the Socialist movement from a political disaster in the next federal election.

Sam Heaton
from Ottawa, Canada writes:
It's interesting, you are all awfully concerned with smearing Jack Layton but nobody is up to the challenge of actually evaluating the budget or Layton's interpretation of it. For Harper and Ignatieff there is obviously a wide gap between 'politics' and 'reality' but that doesn't mean there has to be for Canadians.

D Wiatzka
from Canada writes:
For all those saying the only reason the CPC compromised some of their values in this budget is because of 'Harper's self interest', I submit to you that the CPC chose the lesser of two evils, which happened to include them retaining the PMO.

The choice was between a coalition budget and this budget which is contrary to a number of their principles.

The coalition budget would have potentially been significantly worse from the CPC perspective.

Therefore, choosing the 'known evil' of a spending, deficit budget over the 'unknown evil' of a coalition driven spending, deficit budget was an obviously practical action.

D Wiatzka from Canada writes: Brian W et al - Do you think the amendment can be written in such a way as to force the 'updates' to be some sort of confidence vote?

I ask because I don't really see the updates as being something the CPC will be worried about.

Without it being a confidence matter, updates will be given, the opposition will complain things aren't happening fast enough, the gov't will point out that there are processes to be followed and they have to wait for other participants (provinces, municipalities, etc)

Am I missing something?---------------

I believe that opposition Parties have a certain amout of 'opposition days' where they, and not the government, control the agenda for the day. The government decides those dates at its discretion.

At that time, they can bring forth a motion of non-confidence. The budget is always a confidence motion. Also, during the last session, the government made several issues 'motions of confidence'.

Support countries with decent employment standards and enviromental standards!

*****

Well said!But the bottom line (excuse the pun) is that most businesses and people will buy the lowest cost, even if its made of plastic in China. Protectionism will bring down the wrath of big corporations and their glogalization agenda. Buy local marketing will have to be awfully effective before people believe that a Ford is better than a KIA. Its an uphill battle to remain one of the 'have' nations with a top 10 standard of living.

Auroran Bear
from Montreal, Canada writes:
Kim Philby from Canada writes: Okay, now that you've all got it out of your systems, let's move on to something important: who's gonna take it - The Steelers or the Cards? =================================================

John Smith
from Support Ontario Bill 93-Ottawa,ON, Canada writes:
ROFLOL.....I knew it....Mr. Ignatieff spent the last month spewing disigenuous rhetoric and now we all know he was afraid to put his money where his mouth is. The Liberal Party of Toronto should have chose LeBlanc as their leader. Mr. Ignatieff is a Caretaker Leader.

Beavis Swackhammer
from Talking Softly but ..., writes:
D Wiatzka from Canada writes: For all those saying the only reason the CPC compromised some of their values in this budget is because of 'Harper's self interest', I submit to you that the CPC chose the lesser of two evils, which happened to include them retaining the PMO.

===========================

I don't understand that comment. Anyone can see that Harpo staying in office is a significant evil in and of itself.

G H
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Jack Layton simply has no clue as to strategy. Rigid ideology of the left is no better than rigid ideology of the right--both lead to warfare and confrontational politics, regardless of the merits of the proposals on the table. The rigid snap; the flexible survive.

__________________

Too true! In my view, both Iggy and Harper showed flexability and have won the day. Jack and Gilles on the other hand have voted themselves off the island and are clinging to the wreckage of the Pirate ship 'Coalition'.

Sue Johnson
from Canada writes:
And Iggy - thanks for showing some level-headedness. No one really knows what will benefit the economy - these measures are educated guesses at best. Might as well let the budget pass, report on its progress and re-assess as we go.

Instead of categorically denying the budget before seeing it like Layton did. ??? That's Harper-style partisan politics. And I'm tired of it.

Jasper the Black Lab
from Canada writes:
First order of business for Ignatieff is now complete: Make Jack Layton irrelevant. Again.

Next up: Turf out Harper/Flaherty. This is a quite straightforward and easy, but might realistically take 16 months to complete properly. It is worth taking the time to do it right, because the bigger happy result can be that the Conservatives will be rightfully exiled to oblivion for a decade. Again.

G. Veneta
from Canada writes:
Leadership vacuum all around. This is an election budget not a budget directed at building a sustainable economy for Canada. Print money and give it every group and even the arts to pacify Quebec voters. Sick but not a surprise.

It's a cynical budget and irresponsible. They should have raised the gst back to 7%, nixed the tax free savings accounts and renovation subsidies and instead subsidized making a home energy efficient or by employing alternative energy.

They should have looked at the energy grid across the land and put money into changing it so each home can be an energy generator. They should have looked at the tech sector. Where's the support for innovation for the future?

It is just a lot of money going nowhere and everywhere but nothing that will make a difference. Tax cuts will be useless. So the renovators and drywallers will be busy. Big deal as most of the materials will come from China. Where was the made in Canada? Stunning stimulus. Yawn.

Canada is doomed under the unimaginable twins. Harper Ignatieff? Meme chose .....what's the difference? Iggy says it's not good but will support it anyway. Lame. No guts no glory Iggy. A leader? Where's the vision? The 'BIG' vision?

At least Dion had guts and a vision to restructure the economy to the future. The twins are simply out for power. Too bad we couldn't bring back Martin.

bob saunders
from Belleville, ON, Canada writes:
Eric Baggs from St. John's, Canada writes: Canada, women in particular, has now been thoroughly screwed over. --------------- Please explain how you feel women in particular have been screwed over. I haven't heard this opinion from the numerous women I work with or am related to.

Philosopher King
from Ivory Tower, Canada writes:
The Remnant from Canada writes: '... A and B steal from C to bestow on D. Everyone analyzes how D benefits but ignores the impacts on C as a result of being looted and the current and/or potential beneficiaries of C's money... That better?...'

No, because it's simply wrong.

First of all, A & B are just A.Secondly, C includes components D but you have them listed as separate entities, for example EI and welfare recipients pay income tax.

I am happy that someone here questions things so staunchly, but your analogy is convoluted.

Pierre Elliot Harper
from Ottawa, Canada writes:
The NDP aren't voting for Iggy's lame amendment... so how is it going to pass? If I was Harper I'd laugh at the Liberals and say 'No. We're not adding you're little probation amendment. What are you going to do about it?'

Beavis Swackhammer
from Talking Softly but ..., writes:
... Okay, so looking back a bit... do we all argree that Harper was a brilliant visionary when he said in October that if there was going to be a downturn it would already have happened?

LOL. Good thing we've got someone mature and sensible watching over this bozo to keep him from making too many more mistakes while to Cons find a new leader.

Dave Hall
from Toronto, Canada writes:
At a time like this I'm thrilled somebody has staked out a clear position on accountability. I believe Mr. Ignatieff is absolutely correct in his position here. I would hate to see us waste more time as a nation going through the process of an election just to shift power centres. The process apparently works. We've gone from a silly position of projecting small budget surpluses to taking tangible action to address an alarming and worsening economic climate.

The hard work will be in managing these expenditures and then getting us back to the land of fiscal responsibility while developing a new vision for Canadian prosperity. Let's have an election over that conversation.

elizabeth vann
from victoria, b.c., Canada writes:
So we now have the Conservatives and Liberals in an informal coalition. Let us only hope the Bloc/NDP/Lib formal loser coaltion IS dead.

Jack Layton comes out as the big loser in all of the events since the election. Does he ever look angry. The NDP party is the second biggest loser. Layton should be dumped at the next leadership convention (in August 09?). It may be too late, as Jack has made the NDP irrelevant.

Wayne Morrison
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Sam Heaton from Ottawa. If you weren't so mired in your own murky rhetoric you would be able to grasp a wee bit of reality. The overwhelming majority of corporations in Canada have less than 50 employees, and together they employ over 80% of Canadians. When all those corporations [the ones you see in every neighbourhood when you're out for a bus ride] show a profit, it means Canadians are employed. Perhaps if you didn't live in a city that has less productivity/per capita than any other large city in Canada you would enjoy a more balanced view. When the transit strike is over you can take that bus ride, but to see anything meaningful you'll have to get out of Ottawa.

The Real PS
from Canada writes:
Can anyone explain what Iggy means by 'on probation' I didn't think parliament had 'do overs' I assumed once you voted on something, that was it..Surely he couldn't be posturing could he?

Bill Thompson
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Stan L. No I am not angry with the government for creating the post. I just think it is a waste of rations to have someone in it. It is the responsibility of the government to report and represent the state of the country to its citizens; that is why there are professional bureaucrats that we pay to do this job. >>>>>>What does get me riled is the Liberal instance that all the ills of the world are the fault of the conservatives. Ignatieffs comments in his statement were outrageous in my view. I did hold some faint hope that he would take a non-partisan approach to this whole problem. Instead he kicks the government in the nether regions in a really partisan fashion. As I said earlier, we need an election and the sooner the better. It is time to nail the Liberals to their own petard and make them accountable for all the nonsense they have been spouting like the whopper that the deficit is the governments fault. >>>>>In the meantime the budget officer has shown no credibility and certainly no perspective in his release of numbers willy-nilly. That to me is irresponsibility, not accountability.

The Remnant
from Canada writes:
: Mike from Van from Canada writes: They're all a bunch of liars and opportunists. So what if we have a 1% contraction? We NEED to produce and consume less anyway. I don't believe for a second that we need to go $40B into debt over this tempest in a teapot.

-----

Wish we could produce and consume less. However, our debt based money system, in where 95% or more of our money is created out of thin air by the private banks and injected into the economy, forces infinite economic growth. If growth were to stop, and new loans were not taken out to provide the possibility of paying off old ones, we would end up with a contraction in the money supply. If that happens, money becomes harder and harder to come by. The velocity of money circulation slows down. Individuals and businesses need to service their loans. Out of desperation, businesses begin to streamline and trim capital and operational expenses. Jobs are lost. People conserve more money. Prices fall. Falling prices are actually the antidote to deflation. Government intervention is trying to keep prices from falling, particularly with respect to housing prices to protect the banks from all those people walking into the bank and handing over their keys to eliminate a $400K mortgage on a house that is now worth $200K on the market. If you really want to help the poor, shouldn't the price be allowed to fall? Government intervention caused the housing boom due to artificially cheap interest rates. All those predatory loan makers still have their personal assets intact, because government shields them via limited liability laws. So. Many. Distortions.

Every new bank loan created actually causes a net depletion - because of interest - of money in the money supply once paid off. Artificially low interest rates entice a stampede of borrowing - good times and inflation.

john dancy
from Canada writes:
Lyn Alg , and if Mr Harper says no in june what is the Liberal party going to do? with no money and knowing Canadians dont want an election he will do nothing. His bite has no teeth, dont you see......

Phineas freekinstone
from Canada writes:
Zando Lee 1:36 you have been saying this is the beginning of the end of Harper for how many months now?? He is still there buddy......and for quite a while yet hahahahaha

G L
from Thunder Bay ON., Canada writes:
R Carriere from the Maritimes, Sir in all do respect your dreaming in technicolour. The Coalition is dead! Kaput. Mr Ignatieff had and has no intention of forming a coalition which includes as the majority party he Separatist movement in Quebec. In fact if there's going to be a coalition at all it may be a temporary one between the Government and Liberals. during this recession. Mr Ignatieff is not going to go into a election with the Separtist brand associated with the Liberal Party. It isn't going to happen.

Percy from NL
from Canada writes:
I understand that it would be impossible right now, under the circumstances, for Ignatieff to defeat a budget which is actually fiscally to the left of the Liberals. But I thought his unwillingness to put other substantial amendments on the table was quite weak.

Michel Lebel
from Entrelacs, Canada writes:
A good decision from Ignatieff. The Liberals can now concentrate in putting their own house in order. Going into elections at this time was crazy. So was this coalition deal. As for this budget, everyone can see that the conservatives have little heart in it. It's not part of their philosophy, all this state intervention. One can see that they have a rather limited confidence in their own budget. The governor general can now relax and offer herself and her suite a pleasant holiday in some warm place... God bless the liberals!

Jason Roy
from Central Nova - After October 14th AKA STILL Peter Mackay Country, Canada writes:
NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Jason Roy from Central Nova - After October 14th AKA STILL Peter Mackay Country, Canada writes: Garibaldi III from TO from Canada writes: NL Patriot from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Dan Shortt from Toronto, Canada writes: I have a feeling that when the next federal election occurs that Mr Williams is going to take his ABC campaign all across this country and I for one can't wait. ---- Danny could start a 'none of the above' party ..... and probably win. :-) ---------------------------------------- Danny was just on tv lamenting Iggy`s position... Looks like he`ll have to change that campaign to ABCL.. ------- Jason I was thinking the same thing yesterday. Willaims was enraged when our NL conservative MP's voted for the budget that gutted the Atlantic Accord. He wanted them to vote against it. I am curious to see if he is going to appeal to our Liberal MP's now to break with their leader and vote against this budget? And what will they do. ---------------------------------------- To answer your question - Danny williams was on CBC Newsworld saying he will ask the seven (7) Newfoundland Liberal MPs to vote AGAINST the budget...

A C
from west vancouver, Canada writes:
QUESTION If Jack was to vote for more money for subsidized housingwould that not be a conflict of interest on behalf of Jack and his family, being that they use subsidized housing benefits.

St Fort
from victoria, Canada writes:
Oh Joy........more politics by the political parties.

I just wish there was a way to govern and rule this country that did not involve politicians.

It is such a waste of time to read between the tea leaves,what they really mean,what they really want etc.

If these guys spent half the amount of time they did working for a common cause( a strong prosperous Canada) as they did covering their collective backs.....we would be doing well.

The big prize for all these guys is being in power. They don't give a crap about anything else other than,staying in power,or making the other guy look bad,so people will vote for the 'other guy'. The process makes me sick.

'Canada's recession will be short' ... This is a presumptive guess, not a statistically based prediction. No statistics can predict random spikes.

'By 2013, the deficit will be eliminated' ... We will still be saddled with the debt the deficit created. The number in the ExpenseChart 'Crunching the Numbers' to watch is the PublicDebtCharges. Currently $29.5 BILLION ($29,500,000,000.00) and this will balloon during deficit creation and after.

Freddie Fender
from Canada writes:
This was to be expected. After Dion and Rae were booted out of the Liberal leadership in December, the so-called 'coalition' was not even on life support. This cabal will rightfully be relegated to the dustbin of history as an obscure footnote. However, Layton and Duceppe still need to be punished and they will be, along with the other anti-democratic and pro-separatist elements who conspired to usurp Canadian democracy back in December. Layton's naked grab for power has been exposed for what it really was - a naked grab for power. After this farce perhaps we can once again begin the return to responsible government in Canada without NDP and BQ obstructionism.

Stan L
from Canada writes:
Bill Thompson from Calgary, Canada ....you are just posting to see your name in print now. Give me a big break, the Liberals can blame our current economic status on the Conservatives becuase quite simply it is the Conservatives fault, for what they did, what they failed to do...all of it. It is the price of power, you want to be the chief....you accept the responsibilty that comes with the power and that means dealing with a global crisis honestly and with care.....Harper chose to try and misdirect us at first, then lie to us with his nonsense forcasts and now he is in the doghouse.....had his approached worked he would have taken the credit right? but it didn't so now he has to shoulder the blame...whether you like it or not. Paul Martin had to shoulder a lot of blame for stuff that wasn't of his own making, you presumably had to problem with that now did you?

D Le5
from Canada writes:
Pierre Elliot Harper from Ottawa: It was the CPC talking like that that caused them to pee their pants and prorogue Parliament (again).If they vote against it the LPC will have a case for how the CPC is 'planning something' and doesn't wish to be accountable (the high road they thought they could use to a sure majority after the Sponsorship Scandal - but then they got themselves a few scandals of their own).

In uncertain economic times the public would gladly have their leaders provide more info on how they are doing with the stimulus packages - and the CPC doesn't want to upset the public.

It was a good move by Iggy. But perhaps the CPC will vote against it and then make their own and try to claim it as their idea. Worked for a number of initiatives when they first assumed office. Rename/rebrand something that was already there. Illusion of work

Time to move forward and rebuild our country and our lives the best we can.

...probably the best post all......and besides our democracy including all parties worked today......we have so much to look forward to...all the unfolding scandals....Stevie's suit re. the bribery thing, just to mention a few...and of course Stevie himself, whose demise will not be swift...rather slow and painful...where frequent floggings and poisoned darts find their mark on a semi-daily basis...yep, interesting times ahead....

==========================================

Poor poor Zando. A good day and a bad day all in one.

Harper is still PM, all of Zando's predictions fell flat.

But look on the bright side, you can still vent and rage partisan non-sense and bash Harper some more. Your Harper Derangement Syndrome lives to bash another day!

Jason Roy
from Central Nova - After October 14th AKA STILL Peter Mackay Country, Canada writes:
G H from Calgary, Canada writes: John Kanuck from Canada writes: 450 post and not a single comment from Vern Mcpherson.

____________________________

Hoperfully he's not out fobbing fake $20's at McDonalds again :)

------------------------------

He's probably out trading his 'praise the coalition' talking points - which he just received when he traded his 'praise Dion and the LPC talking points in - in for his 'praise Iggy and the LPC' talking points.

I noticed earlier Sty and John Hertz - who up until a few hours ago were clapping like trained seals at the prospect of a coalition are now in awe of Iggy and the LPC once again so I'm assuming they've already received theirs'.

Bernie Mettbach
from Canada writes:
The Liberal Party of Canada has not changed at all with this impotent leader replacing the last idiot leader. I suppose the best thing we can say is that now that Ignatieff showed that he’s no better than the man he hastily replaced. With the coalition on life-support, a full leadership contest is now possible. After all, the manner in which Ignatieff stole the leadership pretending to be the PM in waiting is no longer a priority. I think the priority is getting a real leader with some courage, not a bag of stale air.

Alberta Dennis Notso,redneck
from Canada writes:
Solution, dump NFL and Quebec, get rid of the NDP party. Run a two party system and cut taxes since we do not have to pay NFL and Quebec to bribe them to stay in the federation. Overhaul the constitution and get real tough on crime. Drug dealers should get charged with second degree murder. Sit back , relax and watch the economy grow. Oh yes and remember to arm the population so they can defend against armed criminals. And dump the gun registry. Throw Allan Rock in jail for telling us it would only cost 2 million dollars. Send the other criminals to Quebec since they have good rehab. programs. Gilles said they do anyway.

john s
from Canada writes:
Liberals have plenty of platitudes and no spine! A time table for an inferior budget is just what the country does not need. Parliament has sat for less than 2 weeks since 2008 and and the crisis worsens. The country has been on automatic pilot, while Canadians wait for some action.

duncan sinclair
from niagara falls, Canada writes:
i will ask mr harper and the new liberal leader (harper light) can either one of you spell ENVIRONMENT? no, i thought so! we all lose with either one of these egomaniacs in power we all lose. Once again, can anyone spell ENVIRONMENT? no, i thought so!

Peter M
from Canada writes:
A C from west vancouver, Canada writes: 'If Jack was to vote for more money for subsidized housing would that not be a conflict of interest on behalf of Jack and his family, being that they use subsidized housing benefits.'

Dave Little
from Surrounded by Idiots, Canada writes:
Well, IGGY has shown us all that being a Harvard Prof has a positive side. He knows how to roll over for Harper. So once again the LIEberals can't be trusted to do anything out of self-interest. I was not surprised though, the signals being sent out by himself and that other Liberal idiot McCallum showed what they were really made of. And that is ..................................HOT AIR!

I will promise IGGY that I will work especially hard to defeat as many Liberals in Southern Ontario as is humanly possible.

So now the Liberals have rolled over 45 times. I'm not sure whether that is pathetic or a record or both.

don willer
from Vancouver, Canada writes:
Ignatieff had no choice, he had to cave, nothing has changed, it is as it should be. Prime Minister Harper is the best choice for the country, Ignatieff will get his turn but his turn is some way off, 3 time loser Layton continues to be the petulant fool.

See Cece
from Toronto, Canada writes:
Ignatieff has definitely emerged the winner this week. He's managed to avoid an election or a Liberal/NDP/BQ coalition, neither of which the majority of Canadians, according to recent polls, want, by essentially supporting the CPC budget. At the same time, by telling Harper 'we'll be watching you, and could still withdraw our support' he's saved face with those in his own party who've been eager to toss the CPC out. Whether or not you support Ignatieff, you have to admit he's a clever tactician. Layton, in contrast, was prepared to postpone any sort of budget--or functioning government--indefinitely, just on principle. Canadians will no doubt take note of both men's actions the next time they do go to the polls.

More importantly, this budget is a major moral victory for the non-Tory parties. Before last month's parliamentary revolt, Harper and Flaherty were poised to release a budget that seemingly ignored or denied the severe global recession. Now they've been forced to pass a budget that, whatever its flaws may be, accepts the new reality by stimulating economic growth, increasing employment and offering household tax relief.

Philosopher King
from Ivory Tower, Canada writes:
The Remnant from Canada writes: '... Government produces no wealth. They take wealth from others and redistribute it to others under their monopoly of the monetary system and violence...'

The government exists to provide structure and oversight.

Without structure and oversight we'd still be living in caves.

Inflation is the natural result of economic growth relative to economic stability, ie the value of your work decreases as the value of others increases relative to your work.

Hugo Hall
from Calgary, Canada writes:
I'm not normally a fan of the Liberal Party, but I am really happy to see Iggy has acted wisely, in the best interest of the country - recognizing that most Canadians don't have any confidence whatsoever in a coalition involving the NDP and Bloc. If Canadians had their way, I suspect most would prefer to see the two major parties work together more often, and for the destructive Bloc and the radical left-wing NDP to be kept in the political wilderness. let's hope this is the beginning of a new spirit of co-operation between the two centrist parties.

D Le5
from Canada writes:
The rise of the LPC. Bet the Cons are kicking themselves for missing the chance at a majority - to Steven Harper the cause of, and solution to, all of your problems (but not in that order)

don willer
from Vancouver, Canada writes:
Dave Little, you have your opinion but Stephen Harper is Prime Minister, he was elected fair and square. Be positive, Canada is the envy of the world, the world will not end.

Philosopher King
from Ivory Tower, Canada writes:
The Remnant from Canada writes: '... another mechanism to swindle C; devalue the money s/he has in their pockets by printing new currency into existence to finance D...'

Inflation is the natural response to ensuring there is enough money to lubricate the economic engine. If the banks didn't print new money we'd run out. If people didn't hoard so much money this might not be so big an issue, but how do plan on stopping that?

Government intervention? LOL

Because the balance is so delicate they usually go for a little inflation rather than deflation.

Nothing you're saying is new or unexpected, though I appreciate that the truth can be shocking to those newly aquainted with it.

Malcolm Thistle
from Canada writes:
Good post Hugo Hall. I couldn't agree more. Layton has revealed himself for what he really is - a self-centered, egotistical, partisan, mean spirited, idealogical, short sighted, extremist. I can't wait for the next election to see the NDP reduced to a neglible rump and this scurge removed from the Canadian political scene.

Walter K
from Victoria, Canada writes:
Enough of this farcical nonsense from the likes of Ignatieff and this ridiculous coalition that claims to act in Canada's better interest.Whether we want it or not, a new election should be in order to determine the overall will of Canadians one way or the other.

Robert Maloney
from Canada writes:
EI this EI that its a farce. Who acutally collects? Not anyone I know. Guess I don't know enough fishermen. The program is simply another tax for working people and their employers. If we each paid into our own account it might have some merit. I hope the Liberals and NDP are happy with this budget. They have helped usher in a huge deficit. Whether or not we can buy our way out of this economic mess remains to be seen.

Philosopher King
from Ivory Tower, Canada writes:
Rich fisher from Barb Hall Human Rights Detention Centre, Canada writes: 'Liberal' would have to stand for something, if you ever want a Liberal to stand for something.

Well apparently this budget is a Liberal budget, and they're not even in power.

Crazy Canuck
from Canada writes:
Capital must protect itself in every possible manner by combination and legislation. Debts must be collected; bonds and mortgages must be foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When, through a process of law, the common people lose their homes they will become more docile and more easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of government, applied by a central power of wealth under control of leading financiers. This truth is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism of Capital to govern the world. By dividing the voters through the political party system, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance. Thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves what has been so well planned and so successfully accomplished.

What a whole lotta nonsense from him. All hat and no cattle. This leash of the Iggy Liberals is about as effectual as the leash put on the Tories by the Dion Liberals over 40 times in the last Parliament.

Iggy doesn't like the budget and doesn't trust the Tories, but he'll let the budget pass.

Liberals - please get a true leader who will bring down a government that is supposedly the antithesis of all you stand for when given the chance. Iggy has shown himself, in true current Liberal fashion, to be a true pantywaist.

Probation? Ha ha ha. And if the Tories don't use the chance they have wisely, I'm sure the Libs will just give them another chance.

Please Liberal supporters - donate much much money to your party so the Iggy Libs can finally be in financial shape to actually say 'no' to the Harper Tories without having to backtrack and wither and we can have a good and true litmus test election.

John Brown
from Maritimes, Canada writes:
People are absolutely unbelievable; all the squawking against the co-alition government and Ignatieff found a way out of that unlikely coupling. He has displayed a great deal of maturity and a willingness to work with the current government in helping Canada and Canadians from our current plight. There are 3 potential options here, work with the government, work against the government in a coalition everyone swears they do not want or go to election. As I see it, the 2nd and 3rd options would only delay immediate action and set Canada back another 3 months before anything could be done about the current state of emergency. That would mean even more cutbacks and layoffs in the private sector putting a greater strain on the EI and welfare systems. What will it take to make everybody happy? Can't be done, 62% of Canadians want Harper and the Conservatives gone while Alberta wants nobody but Harper. I have said for 3 days now that Ignatieff signed the coalition agreement as a show of support for then opposition leader Stephane Dion, he was always cold to the idea of forming any alliance with a socialist party like the NDP. If nothing else Harper has had the fear of a higher power (Ignatieff) thrown into him, Mike is not making idle threats in this case, financing aside he will care through with the promise to bring down Harper if he will not toe the line. This is what I have been waiting for the past 3 years is for our government to start working together.

Eel Expert
from Harper shouldn't have backpaddled, Canada writes:
Bob ... from Canada writes: So how long before Stephen 'there will be no nuclear accident' Harper will pooch this opportunity by returning to his bullyboy ways?

Good point Bob, and why is this CRAP friendly media in Canada downplaying this incident so much??

Give Linda Keen her job back with retroactive pay!

Also noticed the right wingers playing with the swallow line, bunch of childish goofs, GROW UP!

But the really childish one here seems to be Jack 'The Coalition is Dead' Layton.

Guess Harper will continue to have his way with Parliament for a few more years.

Rt. Revd. Malachy Egan
from Halifax, Canada writes:
Harold K., well seems you got what you wanted. Problem is, unless this system is changed, you are going to get what you didn't want, and sooner rather than later.

Robert Maloney
from Canada writes:
You make a good point John Brown. We don't expect much from our M.P.s and they usually live up to our expectations. The exhibition they put on before the break was lower than low on all sides. Hopefully they will get back to underachieving and we can get on with our lives.

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
Philosopher King from Ivory Tower, Canada writes: So anyone else notice that Ignatieff seems to be running the show from the opposition benches?

And you're trying to tell me he's ineffective? ------------------------------------I have a slightly different take. I see him as being effective and working with government. I don't think Iggy or anyone else for that matter is running the show. But if by letting the budget pass you feel he's running things then knock yourself out.

Luke Ellis
from Sudbury, Canada writes:
I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY wanted Harper our of office and do not like this budget but Ignatieff did the right thing. The Coalition is too unpopular meaning that engaging in it would hurt the LPC or the GG would not allow it and call an election. The LPC cannot weather an election right now. Unlike the CPC they do not have the massive amount of private funding the CPC has (because the LPC doesn't only represent the benefit of the wealthy). So this was the right thing to do because forcing an election now could mean a Harper majority, and i will take the lesser eveil of a Harper minority. I just wish Duecepp and Jack were smart rather than throwing a tantrum. Yes you didn't get into power but by declaring the coalition dead you no longer have that particular stick to threaten Harper with.

Madder than Hell Taxpayer
from Canada, Canada writes:
The pseudo-Count Ignatieff is going to dictate to the elected prime minister that he has to submit a report to high un-elected HRH Iggy. I guess Iggy thinks he's still in the classroom and Harper is a student who needs to be graded by authoritative Iggy. Where does Iggy, or as another commenter described him -- King Ikky -- get this authority? From the elite small gang of has-beens who crowned him? May King Ikky should have a real coronation in Vancouver and become Canada's Tsar Ikky the First. Who does he think he is dictating terms to an elected government when he's just come back to Canada and now thinks he knows what's best for us instead of the Canadian in residence, the elected P.M. I don't like giving away money as 'stimulus' but I do not want to see poverty all around me either. So, while I'm not crazy about the budget, it comes from an elected PM who's been here his whole life and not some spoiled rich kid who spent his adult life outside Canada posing as a human rights intellectual. What does Ignatieff know about budgets, anyway? He's had all the advantages of wealth and privilege. I'm so sick of these rich, fake Liberal human rights intellectuals! Someone send Tsar Ikky back to Harvard -- please!

Greg Davies
from Calgary, Canada writes:
Iggy is really good news for Canadians - we finally have a semblance of balance again in the HOC - and perhaps the demise of Dion and Rae will signal the end of a rather sordid chapter in Liberal history.

Kudos to the LPC for finally having the brains and the balls to get it done, and welcome back to the table.

h w
from Waterlogged, Canada writes:
Way to show some spine Iggy! Not..Don't worry, we always knew you were a dud! The Liberals have a certain problem with choosing ineffective and wishy washy leaders, and Ignatieff is no exception. Dion must be dancing and laughing by now.

Bohemian Grove Club Member
from Canada writes:
And thus end the closest Taliban Jack will ever get to any real power in this country, maybe the NDP should now look for someone that doesn't make most everyone sick!

David Beentheredonethat
from Canada writes:
This 'thing' has unfolded exactly as predicted. Exactly! Delightful. And to see Taliban Jack's sour contorted visage on the screen and to listen to his sour little words, made me laugh out loud. Come on Iggy and Stephen. Get to business. Get the cart fixed. All the wheels aren't off. Cheers!

Yakatarina Verbosovich
from asmalldyingProvincialtowninSWOnt, Canada writes:
Listening to the 'moronic platitudes' on this site, is like sitting in our illustrious House of Comas. What idiot would do a 'second' Joe Clark fumble, like introducing Mortage Interest Deductability? Right - again- the rich making themselves richer... time for a revolt!It would be feasible if 'all' Canadians were wealthy enough to have their own homes....but sadly some people can not see past the end of their little, stiff, inadequate, apendages. What a bunch of over-fed, under-educated, greedy elitists some Canadians are!Iggy did the right thing....this time....so he can fill-up his War Chest with kick-backs from this huge budget deficit distribution....lol...Now back to work all you serfs!

Yet another Snow day for the universe!....lol....

Oh - by the way, the IMF just said Canada was ' grossly naieve', in their limited projections......and very over generous as to our GDP growth...we have not even seen the tip of this depression!!

Our Bank of Canada Governor has had one sausage too many...he needs to be replaced...

...This tragedy will continue until 2015 at least! No recovery....little hope....wake up!

How long has it been (perhaps Liberal Pearson?) when we had some vision and true action for this country? With few exceptions, we have become a resource provider for the world and our currency has become a Petro-dollar!

When was the last time Canada was 'excited' by a leader with a vision to the future.

Read JFK's 'challenge' speech in May 1961 to put a man on the moon in a decade: http://tinyurl.com/f5nq

No Party or Leader has any vision, or has the leadership qualities to do so. (Perhaps Ignatieff soon-we'll see....)

What a charge and thrill it would be for a nation-A challenge and projects that would result in a national solidifying effort, if one day a PM would stand up and challenge industry to do (pick a visionary project that is marketable to the world) Then announce they'll 'get out of the way' and provide the necessary tools.

With so many billions being thrown around yesterday, $2 billion a year provides 50,000 jobs at $40,000 per year!

Why not put that towards the DEVELOPMENT of marketable products or services the planet will need in the future.This spent money would stay in the economy and allow us to attract high skilled immigration.

Why not our own 'Manhattan Project' where govt. works with industry to create a new electric car, or R&D in IT, or alternative energy forms that will be in demand-new medical technology (make the blind see-make the stroke victims walk and talk-cure bloody cancer....-see where I'm going?)

Call on the Jim Balsilies of Frank Stronachs ( few examples..) of Canada-people with vision who know how to 'MAKE' things and market them to the world.

I see nothing of that. I only see band-aid short term political solutions with no thought as to what the world will need in 2015-only 6 years away!

I believe there is a hunger in Canada-a hunger for a leader to move Canada forward in the world. We are blessed with so much, and allow it to be squandered by short term, political thinking to the detriment of Canadians.

billy weathers
from toronto, Canada writes:
iggy did the right thinghe did not take the bait and he is smartthe coalition was karlroved to death in the mediaall december would got the liberals in trouble in ontariofunny to see duceppe and layton a little hurt welcome to the michael ignateiff era this guy aint sliced cheese and harper knows itno more neo con tricksmaybe even the media might to start to questionthe george bush karlrove press opsharper aint dead best thing for him would be to resigneverybodys knows his game now wait till the big media outlets decide to go anti harper ctv globe natioal postbecause they have been the ones that have kept him on lifesupport till now

Greg Out West
from Canada writes:
Bohemian Grove Club Member from Canada writes: And thus end the closest Taliban Jack will ever get to any real power in this country, maybe the NDP should now look for someone that doesn't make most everyone sick! -----------------------------------------------------------------For conseratives it's a love hate relationship with Jack and the NDP. We can't stand the guy because he's no more than a greasy snake oil salesman but they take votes away from the liberals that the conservatives wouldn't get in a million years. Jack you da man

Ceesco Pike
from K-town, Canada writes:
Coalition government. Yeh that's it. Let's all get together and kick that Harpster in the buns and get him outa there. We'll collectively have a better widget to sell to the lumpinus publicus.

Fast forward. No coalition. New Liberal leader. Bankrupt Liberal party. No desire for an election. Cowboy Jack Lameone frothing at the end around done on him and Gilles Duplicette all wound up over transfer payment reductions to Kbec.

Martha K.
from Canada writes:
Philosopher King from Ivory Tower, Canada writes: So anyone else notice that Ignatieff seems to be running the show from the opposition benches?'

Greetings. Are you referring to Question Period today? If so, we must have been watching different channels (smile). I saw nothing of the sort. Mr. Ignatieff was somewhat professorial and indignant in his approach but the PM handled himself nicely.

I think we all knew what the scoop would be today - but the PM didn't need to be patronized by a remark concerning accountability which historically has been the Liberal Party's chief failing, nor did we need to hear that the PM is now on 'probation'. A pompous, gratuitous and arrogant remark I thought.

billy weathers
from toronto, Canada writes:
martha k you kidding rightwhat about harper calling artists namesare you nuts or pathologicalharper is mad as a hatterpatronising wowi thought your man was an ecnomic geniusiggy the new kid on the block and i will tell younoe ctvglobe media love himas they should not some character out of alice and wonderland

Yakatarina Verbosovich
from asmalldyingProvincialtowninSWOnt, Canada writes:
Perhaps we can invest 'our' many billions for the future...by developing a nutritous 'donut' with no expiry date, to export and feed the starving masses...there sure is enough excess fecal waste being produced in Ottawa today to cover off supply demands for the next few millenia....

Maple Leafs Suck
from Scarborough, Canada writes:
Luke Ellis from Sudbury, Canada writes: I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY wanted Harper our of office and do not like this budget but Ignatieff did the right thing. The Coalition is too unpopular meaning that engaging in it would hurt the LPC or the GG would not allow it and call an election. The LPC cannot weather an election right now. Unlike the CPC they do not have the massive amount of private funding the CPC has (because the LPC doesn't only represent the benefit of the wealthy). So this was the right thing to do because forcing an election now could mean a Harper majority, and i will take the lesser eveil of a Harper minority. I just wish Duecepp and Jack were smart rather than throwing a tantrum. Yes you didn't get into power but by declaring the coalition dead you no longer have that particular stick to threaten Harper with.

_________________________________________________

That's funny who was it that got hurt the most when the individual and corporate contribution limits came in?

Western Bear
from Canada writes:
They are already here. We lead the world in Forestry, in Mining, in Robotics, in Road Construction, in Fire Fighting, in Human Rights, in Education, in creating a civil multicultured society, with one the highest standards of living in the world.Where have you been?

Bitumen Queen
from Good Old Alberta, Canada writes:
Everyone can keep on discussing & dancing around the real issue during this financial crisis, However it's really Votes, Power, and how to ' 'Appease' ' or ' 'Assimilate Quebec ' '. Iggy should have left John McCallum in the box.

p lailey
from vancouver, Canada writes:
Compos Mentis from in the Darwinian, Wild West...,'At the present moment, I believe that Ignatieff has the potential to live up those sentiments. No, he doesn't walk on water, but I see glimpses of possibilities.'

Just curious. But what glimpses do you see? So far I have not been impressed with the substance of the man although I will grant you that he is miles ahead of Dion tactically. That's definitely an advantage.

Western Bear
from Canada writes:
Although Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberals have YET to pass the budget, I am pleased to see him put away that silly Coalition nonsense. Now lets' get on with, getting Canada out of this mess.

But we Conservatives need to be alert (and learn), they won that last round. Whether we like it or not. We need to work a little harder next election, and get those last few seats, to make sure this 'thing', never re-occurs.

For saying 'NO' to 'Coalition with the Bloc' I Thank-You Mr. Ignatieff.

Luke Ellis
from Sudbury, Canada writes:
Maple Leafs Suck from Scarborough, Canada writes: Luke Ellis from Sudbury, Canada writes: I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY wanted Harper our of office and do not like this budget but Ignatieff did the right thing. The Coalition is too unpopular meaning that engaging in it would hurt the LPC or the GG would not allow it and call an election. The LPC cannot weather an election right now. Unlike the CPC they do not have the massive amount of private funding the CPC has (because the LPC doesn't only represent the benefit of the wealthy). So this was the right thing to do because forcing an election now could mean a Harper majority, and i will take the lesser eveil of a Harper minority. I just wish Duecepp and Jack were smart rather than throwing a tantrum. Yes you didn't get into power but by declaring the coalition dead you no longer have that particular stick to threaten Harper with.

_________________________________________________

That's funny who was it that got hurt the most when the individual and corporate contribution limits came in?

Yes the CPS is able to get less money n but they still have the most private contributions, which was the reason for such limits. Corporations should not decide policy because a politician is afraid to loose their contributions. Even with the limits the CPC is definitely not hurting if they can exceed election spending limits.

MBguy s
from Canada writes:
Yes just as I thought the budget will get passed the way I thought it would. Now the NDP can go back in their corner and whimper like the dogs they are and with their Bloc friends, the country destroyers. This will go in the history books how they acted.

Uncle Fester
from Canada writes:
Any guess how long it will be before Ignatieff heads out to Kabul to visit the troops? He is a journalist and author who has spent much of his career following war. I am sure I read that he had visited the war zone in Kosovo.

The only thing that I can see from stopping him from going is how much value he assigns it in his lust for being PM.

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive,
threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate
option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments
that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

What does moderation mean?

The Globe and Mail is committed to encouraging intelligent discourse among our readers and to creating a forum
where diverse views and opinions on a wide range of topics can be aired. In our continuing efforts to
facilitate a dynamic online conversation we have created two distinct types of forums.

The first type of conversation is a semi-moderated or reactively moderated conversation. Comments submitted to a
semi-moderated conversation pass through a filter that automatically detects inappropriate language or other issues.
The comment then appears on the website.

The second type of conversation is fully moderated. In a fully moderated conversation, every comment is reviewed
by a Globe and Mail editor before it appears on the site. While we will attempt to publish as many comments as possible
there will be occasions where the volume of comments makes it impossible to publish every appropriate submission.
Only registered users of the site may contribute to an online conversation and in all cases the policy
described in our Editor’s note must be followed.

How do I report a comment?

On semi-moderated conversations we encourage our community of readers to assist with the moderation
by alerting us any time a published comment violates our stated policy. Please do not alert us if you
disagree with a comment, find a spelling error or are bothered by multiple postings. Once you submit
a complaint about a comment, a message will be sent immediately to the editors of the site who will
determine whether the remark belongs on the site.

Share this article

What are tags?

A tag is a keyword or descriptive term supplied by our editorial staff used to associate related articles with one another.
Tags make it easier for you to find other stories that share the same theme or topic with the article you’re currently reading.